o 

o 

o 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 

RECEIVED    BY    EXCHANGE 


Class    ^        T 
'  I 


THE  SEQUENCE  OF  TENSES  II  LATIN 


A  Study  Based  on  Caesar's  Gallic  War 


A  DISSERTATION  PRESENTED  TO  THE  FACULTY  OF  ARTS,   LITER- 
ATURE, AND  SCIENCE,  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO, 
IN  CANDIDACY  FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR 
OF  PHILOSOPHY 


BY 
ARTHUR  TAPPAN  WALKER 

PROFESSOR  OF   LATIN  IN   THK  UNIVERSITY  OF  KANSAS 


(Printed  also  in  the  Kansas  University  Quarterly,  Vol.  VII,  No.  4.) 


LAWRENCE.  KANSAS 
1899 


THE  SEQUENCE  OF  TENSES  IN  LATIN 

A  Study  Based  on  Caesar's  Gallic  War 


A   DISSERTATION  PRESENTED  TO  THE  FACULTY  OF  ARTS,   LITER- 
ATURE, AND  SCIENCE,  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO, 
IN  CANDIDACY  FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR 
OF  PHILOSOPHY 


HY 
ARTHUR  TAPPAN   WALKER 

PROFESSOR  OF   I^ATIN  IN    THE   UNIVERSITY  OF   KANSAS 


(Printed  also  in  the  Kansas  University  Quarterly,  Vol.  VII,  No.  4.) 


LAWRKNCE.  KANSAS 
1899 


•5*^«5> 

v*  oe  -r;s 

UNIVERSITY 


CONTENTS. 


The  references  are  to  pages. 

Introduction.        ....  ....  1-5 

Purpose  of  this  study  and  its  relation  to  Professor  Hale's  "Sequence  of 
Tenses,"  i.  The  method  adopted,  3. 

Chapter  I.  .......  .        5-f2 

Meanings  of  indicative  tenses,  5.  Meanings  of  subjunctive  tenses,  6. 
Treatment  of  participles  and  infinitives,  7.  Combinations  of  tenses 
which  may  be  said  to  be  in  sequence,  8.  Reasons  for  prevalence  of 
sequence,  9.  Reasons  for  exceptions,  10.  Miscellaneous  points,  10. 

Chapter  II.      The  descriptive  imperfect  and  imperfect  of  re- 
peated action.        .          .          .          .          .          .          .          .      12-19 

The  imperfect  describing  an  act  which  began  before  the  action  of  its 
principal  verb  and  continued  after  it,  12  The  imperfect  describing 
an  act  which  both  began  and  stopped  at  the  same  time  as  the  action  of 
its  principal  verb,  16.  The  imperfect  describing  an  act  which  lasted 
up  to  the  time  of  its  principal  verb,  17.  The  imperfect  describing  an 
act  which  began  at  the  time  of  its  principal  verb  and  continued  beyond 
it,  18.  The  imperfect  describing  an  act  which  began  after  the  action 
of  its  principal  verb  began  and  ended  before  it  ended,  18. 

Chapter  III.      The  descriptive  pluperfect.  .          .          .      19-23 

The  pluperfect  describing  a  situation  which  began  before  the  action  of 
its  principal  verb  and  continued  after  it,  19.  The  pluperfect  describing 
a  situation  which  both  began  and  ended  at  the  same  time  as  the  action 
of  its  principal  verb,  21.  The  pluperfect  describing  a  situation  which 
lasted  up  to  the  time  of  its  principal  verb,  22.  The  pluperfect  describ- 
ing a  situation  which  began  after  the  action  of  its  principal  verb  began 
and  stopped  before  it  stopped,  23. 

Chapter  IV.      The  aoristic  pluperfect.          ....      23-25 

The  pluperfect  of  an  act  which  simply  preceded  the  act  of  its  principal 
verb,  23.  The  summarizing  aoristic  pluperfect  of  an  act  which  both 
began  and  ended  at  the  same  time  as  the  action  of  its  principal  verb, 
24.  The  summarizing  aoristic  pluperfect  of  an  act  which  lasted  up  to 
the  action  of  its  principal  verb,  24. 

Chapter  V.      The  past  future  and  future  perfect.  .  25-30 

Kinds  of  past  future.  25.  Constructions  in  which  the  past  feeling  is 
emphasized,  27.  Constructions  in  which  the  idea  of  futurity  is  empha- 
sized, 27.  The  spurious  past  future,  29.  The  past  future  in  quin  and 
quominus  clauses,  30. 


207800 


IV  CONTENTS. 

Chapter  VI.      Some  developed  subjunctive  constructions.          30-31 

Chapter  VII.      Tenses  of  repeated  action  depending  on  sim- 
ilar tenses.  ........       31-32 

Chapter  VIII.      Presents,  perfects,  and  futures.  .          .      33-34 

Chapter  IX.      The  remaining  tenses  in  sequence.          .  .      35-39 

Tenses  whose  lack  of  logical  sequence  is  disguised  by  indirect  discourse, 
35.  Idioms  in  which  the  subordinate  clause  is  regularly  of  the  same 
tense  as  the  principal  clause,  37.  Clauses  which  are  properly  out  of 
sequence  but  by  happening  to  depend  on  presents  are  formally  in  se- 
quence, 37.  True  sequence  feeling  triumphing  over  an  idiom,  37. 
Formal  sequence  observed  where  the  sense  might  lead  one  to  expect  an 
exception,  38.  Tenses  in  sequence  used  peculiarly  for  others  which 
would  also  have  been  in  sequence,  38.  Miscellaneous,  39.  Summary 
of  results  so  far  obtained,  39. 

Chapter  X.      Exceptions  to  sequence,          ....      40-44 

Exceptions  in  the  subjunctive,  49.  Tense  iJoms  which  bring  about 
exceptions  in  the  indicative,  41.  Indicative  exceptions  not  resulting 
from  a  fixed  idiom,  42.. 

Chapter  XI.      Coordinate  relative  sentences  and  clauses,          45-46 

Chapter  XII.      The  proof  of  a  sequence  feeling,          .  .      47-52 

Disproportion  between  indicative  and  subjunctive  exceptions  in  certain 
constructions  must  be  explained  by  sequence,  47.  Theoretical  ground 
for  sequence  feeling,  49.  The  results  of  an  examination  of  other 
authors,  52. 


The  Sequence  of  Tenses  in  Latin. 


An  Investigation  Based  on  Caesar's  Gallic  War. 


BY  ARTHUR  TAPPAN  WALKER. 


INTRODUCTION. 

The  object  of  my  investigation  is  to  determine  just  how  far  the 
tenses  of  the  subjunctive  correspond  in  meaning  and  usage  to  those 
of  the  .indicative,  and  whether  there  is  any  mechanical  "sequence 
of  tenses"  in  the  one  mood  which  does  not  appear  in  the  other.  My 
theory  of  the  uses  of  the  tenses  and  the  starting  point  of  my  inves- 
tigation are  furnished  by  Professor  William  Gardner  Hale's  papers 
on  The  Sequence  of  Tenses,  in  the  American  Journal  of  Philology, 
VII,  4  (1886);  VIII,  i  (1887);  IX,  2  (1888).  In  that  study  he  takes 
the  ground  that  the  tenses  of  the  Subjunctive  always  (or  with  very 
few  exceptions)*  have  their  own  meanings  and  that  there  is  no  such 
thing  as  a  mechanical  sequence  of  tenses.  As  will  appear  later,  I 
am  led  to  agree  fully  with  the  first  half  of  this  proposition;  but  the 
second  half  does  not  necessarily  follow,  and  with  it  I  can  not  agree. 

In  a  foot-note  of  his  last  paper  Professor  Hale  makes  the  state- 
ment :  "It  has  been  my  intention  to  prepare  complete  statistics  of 

*  For  these  see  A.  J.  P.  VIII,  pp.  54-56.  This  discussion  of  them  is  summarized  in  A. 
J.  P.  IX,  pp.  18-15)  of  reprint,  as  follows: 

"In  a  great  number  of  cases  of  what  is  called  the  subjunctive  'by  assimilation,  the 
modal  feeling  which  in  the  main  clause  expresses  itself  in  the  subjunctive  of  a  certain 
tense  continues  to  exist,  either  unchanged  in  kind,  or  only  slightly  sbaded,  in  the 
clauses  attached  to  it.  and  is  therefore  expressd  by  the  same  mode,  and  by  a  tense 
that  indicates  the  same  point  of  view.  But  the  frequent  recurrence  of  such  examples 
gives  rise  to  the  occasional  use  of  a  dependent  subjunctive  with  only  a  formal  like- 
ness to  the  main  subjunctive,  and  no  true  modal  feeling:  and  it  is  the  common  opinion, 
that  in  such  cases  the  tense  is  likewise  purely  formal." 


2  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

the  uses  of  the  tenses  in  dependent  indicative  clauses  in  the  Gallic 
War,  but  other  occupations  oblige  me  to  postpone  the  plan.  I  have 
already  gone  far  enough,  however,  to  warrant  the  statements  made 
in  the  present  paper."  As  he  has  never  found  it  possible  to  carry 
out  this  plan,  he  has  allowed  me  to  undertake  the  work. 

In  its  boldest  and  baldest  form  the  "rule  of  the  sequence"  sim- 
ply says  that  in  subjunctive  subordinate  clauses  primary  tenses  fol- 
low primary  and  secondary  follow  secondary,  leaving  a  natural 
impression  that  the  tenses  of  the  subjunctive  are  meaningless  and 
depend  only  formally  on  the  tense  of  the  main  verb.  This  form  of 
the  doctrine  is  the  one  which  Professor  Hale  set  out  to  attack  espe- 
cially. It  is  safe  to  say  that  no  one  now  advocates  such  a  doctrine. 
Every  one  admits  that  the  tenses  of  the  subjunctive  have  some 
meaning,  though  there  might  be  a  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the 
amount  and  kind  of  this  meaning.*  It  is  an  undoubted  fact  that 
the  tenses  of  the  subjunctive  do  follow  this  rule  in  the  great  major- 
ity of  cases.  No  one  is  prepared  to  say  how  far  this  is  due  to  the 
logical  relation  of  ideas  in  the  sentence,  as  expressed  by  tense,  and 
how  far  it  is  due  to  a  mechanical  blurring  of  these  relationships  by 
a  formal  sequence  of  tense.  This  is  the  question  to  the  solution  of 
which  this  paper  is  intended  to  contribute. 

Professor  Male's  method  of  attacking  the  doctrine  in  his  first  pa- 
per was  to  collect  a  large  number  of  exceptions  to  the  rule  and  show 
that  in  each  case  the  tenses  in  them  were  used  because  they  ex- 
pressed what  the  writer  had  to  say.  Therefore  the  subjunctive 
tenses  had  meanings.  Therefore  it  was  fair  to  suppose  that  all  sub- 
junctives had  tense  force  even  if  used  in  sequence.  In  his  second 
paper  he  answered  a  number  of  objections  to  his  own  theory  and 
adduced  a  number  of  positive  arguments  in  its  favor.  For  example, 
the  aorist  subjunctive  may  depend  on  a  present,  but  verbs  depend- 
ing on  it  are  usually  in  secondary  sequence.  This  can  not  be 
explained  by  the  rule,  but  is  very  simple  on  the  theory  that  the 
tenses  of  the  subjunctive  have  meaning.  From  this  discussion  he 
concluded  that  the  "tenses  of  the  Latin  subjunctive,  alike  in  depend- 
ent and  in  independent  sentences,  tell  their  own  temporal  story,— 
that  no  such  thing  as  is  meant  by  the  doctrine  of  the  sequence  of 
tenses  exists."  This  left  his  position  open  to  attack  on  two  sides. 
On  the  one  side  Professor  Gildersleeve  (A.  J.  P.  Vol.  VIII,  p.  228)t 

*It  Is  unfortunate,  however,  that  even  the  latest  of  the  American  gram  mars  give  but 
a  scanty  treatment  of  the  meanings  of  the  subjunctive  tenses  and  still  cling  closely  to 
the  mechanical  rule.  This  course  may  be  pedagogical ly  easier,  and  the  admirable 
treatment  of  the  tenses  in  Lattmann  Mueller  may  be  too  full  for  pedagogical  purposes, 
but  the  contrast  is  not  creditable  to  our  books. 

t  Professor  Bale's  reply  to  this  is  given  in  his  third  paper,  which  also  gives  a  full 
treatment  pf  the  meanings  of  the  subjunctive  tenses. 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  3 

argued  that  these  exceptions  did  not  necessarily  prove  more  than 
that  where  the  strain  on  tense  meaning  was  too  great  an  exception 
might  occur,  but  in  spite  of  these  exceptions  there  was  a  certain 
amount  of  flattening  out  of  the  fine  distinctions  of  tense  in  the  sub- 
junctive, due  to  sequence.  And,  on  the  other  side,  as  I  have  already 
said,  I  hope  to  show  at  the  end  of  this  paper  that,  even  granting  that 
every  tense  of  the  subjunctive  always  has  its  own  meaning,  it  would 
not  necessarily  follow  that  there  was  no  such  thing  as  sequence  of 
tenses, — even  a  mechanical  one. 

A  part  of  Professor  Male's  purpose  in  his  plan  of  collecting  the 
statistics  for  the  indicative  tenses  was  to  show  that  in  the  great  ma- 
jority of  cases  the  indicative  follows  the  rule  of  sequence,  and  that 
therefore  it  would  not  do  to  state  a  rule  for  the  one  mood  more  than 
for  the  other.  He  intended  to  do  more  than  this,  however.  A  sim- 
ple enlargement  of  this  plan  would  have  been  to  count  the  excep- 
tions in  the  subjunctive  as  well,  and  compare  the  two  moods  in  that 
way.  But  this  would  not  have  been  sufficient.  After  the  work  had 
been  done  it  would  still  have  been  open  for  any  one  to  say  that  in 
an  unknown  number  of  cases  the  subjunctive  tenses  had  been  flat- 
tened out  in  meaning.  If,  however,  it  is  impossible  to  make  out 
the  exact  meaning  of  each  tense  of  the  indicative  and  subjunctive, 
and  the  exact  relationship  of  each  subordinate  tense  to  its  principal 
verb,  we  can  then  see  just  how  much  of  this  flattening  has  taken 
place  in  the  subjunctive  over  and  above  that  which  has  befallen  the 
indicative  tenses.  And  this  was  the  task  Professor  Hale  had  set 
himself,  which  I  have  endeavored  to  carry  out. 

My  method  has  been  as  follows  :  I  have  made  as  careful  an  ex- 
amination as  possible  of  every  tense  in  Caesar's  Gallic  War.  It 
seemed  useless  for  my  purpose  to  give  statistics  for  the  relations  of 
the  independent  aorists,  or  most  independent  presents  and  futures 
to  each  other,  and  they  have  been  cut  out,  though  presents  depend- 
ing on  aorists,  etc.,  have  of  course  been  given.  The  paper  is 
intended  to  include,  therefore,  all  dependent  indicatives  and  sub- 
junctives, all  independent  indicatives  whose  relation  to  other  verbs 
can  be  paralleled  in  dependent  clauses,  with  the  exception  of  aorists 
following  aorists  in  consecutive  narration.  All  these  verbs  have 
been  classified  in  as  minute  subdivisions  as  seemed  at  all  practica 
ble,  the  independent  indicatives,  the  dependent  indicatives,  and  the 
subjunctives  being  kept  separate.  The  classification  is  made  as  far 
as  possible  on  the  basis  of  distinctions  of  tense  alone,  not  of  the 
syntax  of  the  clause  ;  but  some  constructions  nre  so  peculiar  in  their 
meanings  that  it  was  necessary  to  keep  them  by  themselves.  These 


4  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

groups  have  then  been  compared  with  each  other  to  see  how  far 
the  independent  indicatives,  the  dependent  indicatives,  and  the  sub- 
junctives correspond  to  one  another.  The  future  uses  of  the  sub- 
junctive correspond  to  nothing  in  the  indicative.  The  effort  here 
has  been  simply  to  make  sure  that  each  tense  is  or  is  not  used  in 
strict  harmony  with  the  statement  of  its  use  which  is  to  be  given 
presently.  There  then  remain  some  subjunctive  and  many  indi- 
cative verbs  whose  tenses  are  exceptions  to  the  rule  of  sequence. 
These  have  been  classified  and  explained  so  far  as  was  possible. 

I  can  not,  of  course,  hope  that  anyone  else  who  should  subject 
the  tenses  of  Caesar  to  a  careful  scrutiny  would  classify  the  exam- 
ples in  every  case  as  I  have  done,  even  if  he  were  satisfied  to  use 
the  same  categories  at  all.  After  the  first  classification  each  of  the 
examples  has  been  given  at  least  one  careful  and  one  more  hasty 
examination,  and  each  time  some  changes  have  been  made  ;  and  I 
cannot  doubt  that  in  any  number  of  further  examinations  I  myself 
should  each  time  make  some  further  changes.  This  is  especially 
true  in  the  hopeless  attempt  to  make  a  satisfactory  separation  of  the 
imperfects  of  repeated  action  from  the  descriptive  imperfects,  and 
the  aoristic  pluperfects  from  the  descriptive.  But  I  do  hope  that  I 
should  be  found  to  have  treated  the  indicatives  and  subjunctives 
alike,  so  that  where  errors  of  judgment  appeared  in  the  treatment 
of  one  mood  they  would  be  found  to  be  balanced  by  corresponding 
errors  in  the  treatment  of  the  other.  In  that  case  my  classification 
will  have  served  its  chief  end. 

The  study  of  the  tenses  in  Caesar's  Gallic  War  is,  of  course,  far 
from  settling  so  broad  a  question  as  that  of  the  sequence  of  tense, 
but  it  seems  to  me  that  from  even  so  limited  a  field  as  this  one  can 
arrive  at  some  probable  conclusions.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  I  am 
sure  that  the  question  can  never  be  settled  by  bringing  forward  a 
miscellaneous  mass  of  examples  on  either  side,  but  must  depend  on 
the  full  and  minute  studies  of  individual  authors. 

In  concluding  this  prefatory  portion  of  my  paper,  I  wish  to  ex- 
press my  gratitude  to  Professor  Hale  for  the  help  and  inspiration  I 
have  received  from  him  in  the  line  of  syntactical  study,  both  in  his 
lecture  room  in  the  University  of  Chicago  and  in  the  subsequent 
relations  which  I  bore  to  him  as  instructor  in  his  department.  No 
statement  of  my  obligation  to  him  in  this  respect  could  be  beyond 
the  truth.*  The  results  of  my  paper  bear  out  his  main  contention 

*  While  apparently  not  regarded  as  a  matter  of  much  moment,  I  will  add  that  my  ob- 
ligations extend  even  to  terminology  in  some  degree.  E.  g,,  the  term  "volitive."  which 
seems  to  be  finding  favor  in  some  quarters.  I  at  least  got  from  him.  Among  others 
might  be  mentioned  "determinative  clause,"  "non-essential  clause."  "balancing 
clause  " 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  5 

most  fully,  though  in  some  respects  I  can  not  wholly  agree  with 
him,  and  though  I  have  naturally  laid  more  stress  on  the  points  of 
divergence  than  on  those  of  agreement.  If  my  points  are  good, 
they  are  made  with  tools  received  from  him.  If  they  are  bad,  the 
fault  is  my  own. 

If  I  had  felt  that  a  dedication  was  in  order,  it  would  have  been  to 
him  and  to  the  other  man  who  has  most  helped  and  influenced  me, 
Chancellor  James  H.  Kirkland,  of  Vanderbilt  University,  from 
whom  I  first  received  a  decided  impulse  toward  Latin  studies. 
Though  I  have  received  from  him  no  direct  assistance  toward  this 
paper,  it  would  certainly  never  have  been  written  but  for  the  in- 
spiration received  from  him, 

CHAPTER  I. 

My  study  of  the  meanings  of  the  tenses  leaves  me  in  substantial 
agreement  with  Professor  Hale's  statement  of  them,*  though  with 
some  difference  in  detail,  and  though  I  found  a  fuller  discussion  of 
the  subjunctive  tenses  necessary.  The  statements  that  follow  are 
intentionally  brief,  but  cover  the  main  points.  Additional  details 
are  given  as  occasion  arises  later  in  the  paper. 

All  tenses  of  the  indicative  express  one  or  both  of  the  following 
ideas:  i.  The  time-sphere  of  an  act  or  state  (past,  present,  or 
future).  2.  The  stage  of  advancement  of  the  act  or  state  in  its 
time-sphere  (completed,  in  process,  or  imminent).  In  addition, 
the  tenses  which  express  the  stage  usually  imply  relativity  of  time 
to  the  time  of  another  verb  ( priority,  contemporaneousness,  or 
futurity). 

Aoristic  tenses  simply  state  the  act,  etc.,  as  an  occurrence,  giving 
only  the  time-sphere,  not  the  stage.  Those  recognized  by  Professor 
Hale  are  the  historical  perfect  (aorist  proper),  the  aoristic  present, 
and  the  aoristic  future.  I  find  it  necessary,  for  a  reason  to  be  given 
more  fully  in  speaking  of  the  pluperfect,  to  include  among  the 
aoristic  tenses  the  aoristic  pluperfect.  To  be  consistent,  one  must 
either  call  one  use  of  the  pluperfect  aoristic,  or  else  call  the  true 
aorist  depending  on  a  present  a  tense  of  stage.  So,  too,  there  is  an 
aoristic  future  perfect  as  well  as  a  future  perfect  of  the  stage. 

The  aorist,  of  course,  has  nothing  to  do  with  momentariness  of 
action,  but  is  often  used  to  express  in  summary  a  long  continued  or 
repeated  act. 

Tenses  of  stage  state  the  act  as  it  was,  is,  or  will  be  at  a  time  which 

*As  given  in  his  third  paper  on  Sequence,  in  his  Ci/m-Constructions  'Cornell  Studies 
in  Classical  Philology.  Part  1, 1887,  Par;  II,  18-S9),  and  especially  in  the  advance  sheets, 
printed  iu  1895,  of  his  unfortunately  still  unpublished  Moods  and  Tenses. 


6  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

is  in  mind.  They  express  both  time-sphere  and  stage,  and  imply 
relativity.  They  are,  for  the  past,  the  pluperfect,  the  imperfect, 
and  the  periphrastic  ;  for  the  present,  the  present  perfect,  or  true 
perfect,  the  present,  and  the  periphrastic;  for  the  future,  the  future 
perfect,  the  future,  and  the  periphrastic.  In  this  paper  the  imminent 
side  of  the  periphrastic  futures  has  been  disregarded,  and  they  have 
been  classified  with  regard  to  the  copula  alone.  Out  of  the  use  of 
the  imperfect  to  represent  an  act  as  in  process  grow  the  conative 
imperfect,  the  imperfect  of  repeated  action,  and  what  is  here  called 
the  persistent  imperfect.  By  way  of  distinction  from  these  latter 
imperfects,  the  ordinary  imperfect  is  here  called  the  descriptive 
imperfect. 

The  pluperfect  has  two  quite  distinct  meanings,  though  it  is  not 
always' possible  to  be  sure  of  the  force  of  a  given  example.  It  may 
represent  a  past  situation  resulting  from  a  previous  act,  as,  e.  g.,  in 
convenerant,  "they  had  come  together,"/,  e.,  "were  in  meeting." 
Or  it  may  represent  an  act  which  is  over  and  done  with  at  the  time 
of  the  principal  verb,  as  in  cuius  pater  regnum  multos  annos  ob  tinner  at, 
"had  had"  (but  had  no  longer).  Professor  Hale  seems  to  regard 
this  latter  use  as  a  mere  development  of  the  other,  for  in  speaking 
of  the  tenses  of  stage,  after  giving  the  former  use  of  the  pluperfect 
he  says,  •'  Since  the  activity  itself  must  have  been-  prior  to  the  com- 
pleted result,  the  pluperfect  comes  also  to  be  used  to  denote  an  act 
as  having  taken  place  before  the  certain  past  time  which  the  speaker 
or  writer  has  in  mind."  It  seems  to  me  better  to  recognize  the  plu- 
perfect as  a  past  perfect,  either  a  true  perfect  or  an  aorist.  The 
past  perfect  proper  is  a  tense  of  stage  ;  the  past  aorist  is  not.  The 
former,  I  call  in  this  paper  the  descriptive  pluperfect ;  the  latter, 
the  aoristic  pluperfect. 

Professor  Hale's  treatment  of  the  subjunctive  tenses  in  the  publish- 
ed papers  to  which  I  have  alluded  is  not  satisfactory  for  my  purpose. 
His  statement  of  the  uses  of  those  tenses  seems  to  me  good  for  peda- 
gogical purposes,  but  not  sufficient  for  this  investigation.  His  ex- 
planation, of  the  origin  of  these  uses  seems  to  me  to  be  put  less 
definitely  than  one  could  wish,  and  is  certainly  less  satisfactory 
than  the  treatment  given  the  subject  in  the  advance  sheets  of  his 
Moods  and  Tenses. 

His  statement  of  uses  is  as  follows  :  (A.  J.  P.,  Vol.  VIII,  p.  69). 
"In  other  words,  in  practical  use  each  tense  of  the  subjunctive  is 
found  to  be  employed  with  two  distinct  ideas,  one  that  which  is  in- 
dicated by  the  tense  of  the  indicative  bearing  the  same  name  (as  in 
indirect  questions),  the  other  a  future  idea  (as  in  the  final  clause, 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  7 

commands  in  indirect  discourse,  etc.);  so  that  the  so-called  pluper- 
fect and  the  so-called  perfect  serve,  from  their  respective  stand- 
point,* as  either  perfect  or  future  perfect,  and  the  so-called  imperfect 
and  present  serve  from  their  respective  standpoints  as  either  pres- 
ent or  future."  That  is,  the  present  serves  as  present  or  future  ; 
the  imperfect  as  either  imperfect  or  future  to  the  past ;  the  perfect 
as  either  perfect  or  future  perfect,  and  the  pluperfect  as  either  plu- 
perfect or  future  perfect  to  the  past. 

A  fuller  discussion  of  the  relation  of  these  two  classes  of  mean- 
ings to  each  other  may  be  reserved  to  a  later  portion  of  this  paper. 
It  will  be  sufficient  for  the  present  to  say  that  the  constructions  in 
which  the  tense  meanings  correspond  to  those  of  the  indicative  are 
developments  out  of  constructions  in  which  the  subjunctive  has  the 
other  tense  meanings.  They  are  chiefly  clauses  of  result,  charac- 
terizing clauses,  causal  and  adversative  relative  clauses,  and  cum- 
clauses  ;  indirect  questions  and  indirect  discourse  ;  the  concessive 
subjunctive,  either  independent  or  with  quamvis  or  ut. 

In  all  these,  except  some  result  and  characterizing  clauses,  the 
meanings  of  the  tenses  are  the  same  as  those  laid  down  for  the  in- 
dicative. In  his  second  paper  (A.  J.  P.,  Vol.  VIII,  p.  49)  Professor 
Hale  has  given  what  seems  to  me  a  satisfactory  explanation  of  the 
familiar  fact  that  in  result  clauses  and  characterizing  clauses  the  im- 
perfect is  often  used  where  a  corresponding  indicative  construction 
would  have  required  the  aorist.  In  tain  fortiter  pugnaverunt  ut  vin- 
ccrcnt,  the  result  clause  has  developed  its  usual  meaning  of  "so 
that  they  did  conquer"  out  of  an  original  "whereby  they  would 
naturally,"  in  which  the  imperfect  subjunctive  has  its  proper  mean- 
ing. But  both  tense  and  mood  remained  unchanged,  though  they 
had  taken  on  a  force  which  would  naturally  have  been  expressed  by 
the  aorist  indicative. 

In  conditions  and  wishes,  contrary  to  fact,  the  imperfect  and 
and  pluperfect  have  taken  on  a  meaning  of  contrariety  to  fact  in 
simple  present  and  past  time  respectively.  The  explanation  of  this 
fact  is  too  well  understood  to  need  repetition  here. 

Participles  and  infinitives  express  only  the  stage,  taking  their 
time-sphere  from  the  principal  verb.  It  was  beside  my  purpose  to 
treat  of  the  tense  uses  of  these  forms  for  themselves  ;  but  where 
other  verbs  depend  on  them,  they  are  treated  as  if  depending  on  a 
corresponding  indicative  tense  of  stage,  For  example,  an  imperfect 

*  Professor  Hale's  use  of  the  terms  "  standpoint "  and  "  point  of  view  "  has  been  criti- 
cized on  the  ground  that  a  tense  can  have  but  one  standpoint  or  point  of  view,  namely, 
the  present  time  of  the  speaker  or  writer.  I  have  accordingly  used  the  term  "  point  of 
reference,"  although  I  do  not  think  that  misunderstanding  could  arise  from  the  use  of 
his  terms. 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

depending  on  a  perfect  participle  which  itself  depends  on  a  past 
tense,  is  classified  as  if  it  depended  on  a  descriptive  pluperfect 

We  have  next  to  consider  how  the  tenses  behave  in  combination, 
and  for  my  purpose  it  is  especially  important  to  ascertain  just  what 
is  meant  by  the  sequence  of  tense,  and  what  combinations  of 
indicatives  with  other  verbs  are  to  be  regarded  as  falling  under  the 
same  rule.  Caesar's  narrative  lies  wholly  in  the  past,  with  occa- 
sional digressions  in  the  present.  Therefore  I  lack  examples  for  the 
future  almost  entirely,  and  I  say  nothing  about  certain  troublesome 
points  in  the  relations  of  futures  with  other  tenses.  I  leave  them 
in  hopes  that  I  may  at  some  time  be  able  to  give  some  other  author 
a  thorough  examination  with  reference  to  these  points. 

A  consideration  of  all  the  cases  in  which  a  subjunctive  can  be  said 
to  follow  another  verb  in  sequence  will,  I  'believe,  show  that  they 
all  (except  the  result  clauses  and  conditions  contrary  to  fact  which 
have  already  been  spoken  of)  fall  under  the  three  following 
categories  : 

1.  All-  tenses  of  stage  that  belong  to  the  same  time-sphere  as  the 
principal  verb   are   said  to  be  "in  sequence."     This  includes,   for 
instance,  all  descriptive  imperfects  and  pluperfects  depending  on  a 
past  tense.      But  a  tense  of  stage  depending  on  a  verb  of  a  different 
time-sphere,  as  an  imperfect  depending  on  a  present,  is  an  exception. 

2.  The  aorist  is  in  sequence  with  a  present,  and  the  aoristic  plu- 
perfect with  a  past.      The  aorist  is  the  tense  the  user  of  which,  so 
to  speak,  stands  in   the  present  and  looks  back  at  the  past.      It  is 
the  natural  link  between  the  present  time-sphere  and  the  past.      It 
is  to  be  noted  that  the  reverse  does  not  hold  good.      A  present  or 
perfect  depending  on  an   aorist  is  out  of    sequence.      So,   too,    an 
aorist  depending  on  an  aorist  is  out  of  sequence.     The  relations  be- 
tween a  past  and  the  aoristic   pluperfect  are  precisely  the  same  as 
those  between  the  present  and  the  aorist.      The  pluperfect  depend- 
ing on  a  past  is  in  sequence.     It  is  a  mere  accident  of  language  that 
many  imperfects  and  pluperfects  depending  on  aoristic  pluperfects 
are  not  exceptions  in  form  as   they  are   in  logic.      This  pluperfect 
really  looks   back  from  a  past  time-sphere  to    another  lying   still 
further  back  ;   but  language  does  not  possess  a  set  of  tenses  to  ex- 
press the  relations  in  that  time-sphere.      If  there  were  such  tenses 
it   would  be   clear  that  only  they  could   be  in   sequence  with   the 
aoristic  pluperfect,  and  that  an  imperfect,  for  example,  belonging 
to  the  usual  past  time-sphere  is  as  much  out  of  sequence  with  this 
pluperfect  as  is  a  present  with  an  aorist.     So,  too,  one  aoristic  plu- 
perfect is  as  much  out  of  sequence  with  another  as  one  aorist  with 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  9 

another.  But  in  both  these  cases  language  has  to  get  along  with 
the  ordinary  tenses  of  the  past  time-sphere,  and  on  the  surface  the 
sequence  appears  as  regular  as  if  the  pluperfect  were  descriptive. 

3.  A  subjunctive  with  future  meaning  is  in  sequence  if  its  "  point 
of  reference,"  past  or  present,  belongs  to  the  time- sphere  of  the 
principal  verb.  That  is,  a  future  from  the  past  (imperfect)  is  in 
sequence  with  a  past  verb. 

In  the  indicative  the  third  categpry  does  not  appear  ;  but  the 
other  two  can  be  applied  directly  to  the  indicative,  and  in  what 
follows  tenses  of  these  kinds  will  be  spoken  of  as  in  sequence. 

In  such  a  narrative  as  Caesar's  the  great  majority  of  the  independ- 
ent verbs  are  aorists  ;  and  the  dependent  ones,  both  indicative  and 
subjunctive,  are  imperfects  and  pluperfects.  The  reason  is  this. 
When  a  man  thinks  of  any  series  of  events  his  mind  selects  certain 
ones  which  seem  to  him  to  stand  forth  as  the  salient  points  in  the 
series.  To  these  he  looks  back  from  the  present  as  occurrences, 
and  he  expresses  them  by  the  appropriate  tense,  the  aorist.  But 
the  same  reason,  that  they  are  the  salient  points,  leads  him  to  ex- 
press them  in  independent  sentences.  In  connection  with  these 
salient  points  and,  so  to  speak,  grouped  around  them  he  thinks  of 
other  events  which  seem  to  him  of  subordinate  interest  except  as 
they  influenced  the  main  events,  or  he  thinks  of  natural  phenomena 
as  present  during  those  events,  or  of  men's  feelings  during  them, 
etc.  Now,  all  these  things  he  naturally  thinks  of  as  they  were  at 
the  time  of  his  important  events.  That  means  that  he  will  express 
them  by  the  proper  tenses  of  the  stage.  But  for  the  same  reasons 
he  will  usually  make  .subordinate  clauses  of  them,  though  he  may 
put  them  in  independent  sentences,  and  always  will  do  so  if  they 
are  too  many  in  number  to  make  a  satisfactory  complex  sentence. 

He  may  also  think  of  other  events  as  having  occurred  previously 
to  the  event  of  which  he  is  speaking.  If  they  seem  to  him  of  inde- 
pendent interest,  he  looks  at  them  from  the  present  and  expresses 
this  attitude  by  the  use  of  the  aorist.  But  this  same  feeling  will 
usually  lead  him  to  make  an  independent  sentence.  If,  however,, 
they  are  thought  of  in  connection  with  the  event  of  which  he  is 
speaking,  he  will  use  the  aoristic  pluperfect  and  will  naturally  make 
a  subordinate  clause  of  the  statement. 

The  constructions  which  contain  the  future  use  of  the  subjunctive 
are  such  that  only  a  very  few  of  them  can  be  thought  of  except  in 
relation  to  the  time  of  their  main  verbs.  A  command,  for  instance,, 
can  hardly  be  thought  of  except  in  relation  to  the  time  of  the  verb 
of  commanding  on  which  it  depends  ;  though  it  is  true  that  after  a 


TO  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

past  tense  the  command  may  retain  the  original  present,  by  reprce- 
sentatio.  But  this  is  in  no  sense  an  exception  to  sequence. 

It  seems,  then,  to  be  entirely  in  accordance  with  the  natural 
workings  of  the  mind  that  while  the  principal  verbs  in  a  narrative 
are  aorists  in  the  majority  of  cases,  the  subordinate  ones  are  regu- 
larly imperfects  and  pluperfects.  But  there  are  two  other  possi- 
bilities. 

The  writer  may,  though  he  looks  at  a  subordinate  act  aoristically, 
choose  to  speak  of  it  in  a  subordinate  clause. 

He  may  also  wish  to  give  a  still  existing  reason  for  a  past  act,  or 
a  still  existing  result  of  it,  etc.  Then  he  will  use  a  present  or  a 
perfect,  whether  his  choice  is  for  a  dependent  or  an  independent 
mode  of  expression. 

Both  of  these  usages  are,  of  course,  exceptions  to  the  rule  of 
sequence.  One  of  the  chief  objects  of  this  paper  is  to  show  how 
the  ratio  of  exceptions  to  regular  uses  in  the  indicative  compares 
with  the  corresponding  ratio  in  the  subjunctive,  and  so  far  as  pos- 
sible to  explain  the  difference.  No  one  would  doubt  that  many 
more  exceptions  are  to  be  expected  in  the  indicative.  Professor 
Hale  has  taken  the  ground  that  this  discrepancy  is  accounted  for 
wholly  by  the  fact  that  the  indicative  constructions  are  in  the  mass 
less  closely  connected  in  thought  with  the  main  clause  than  are  the 
subjunctive  ones.  How  far  this  explains  the  facts  is  to  be  discussed 
later. 

Before  proceeding  to'  my  detailed  classification,  it  is  necessary  to 
speak  briefly  of  a  number  of  more  or  less  disconnected  points. 

The  text  used  is  that  of  Dinter's  edition. 

Where  my  headings  speak  of  the  "  act  "  of  a  verb,  the  expression 
must  be  understood  to  mean  "  act  or  state,"  according  to  the  mean- 
ing of  the  verb. 

The  treatment  of  co-ordinate  relative  clauses  was  a  point  of  dif- 
ficulty. Some  of  them  are  entirely  independent  sentences,  while 
others  are  close  to  subordinate  clauses.  I  finally  decided  to  treat 
all  relatives  which  are  to  be  translated  by  "and  he"  or  "but  he," 
etc.,  as  if  et  or  sedy  etc.,  had  actually  been  used.  Consequently,  such 
clauses  or  sentences  are  given  under  independent  sentences,  or  as 
if  co-ordinate  with  subordinate  verbs.  That  this  is  not  strictly  in 
accord  with  Caesar's  feeling,  is  shown  by  the  frequency  with  which 
he  uses  subjunctives  instead  of  infinitives  in  such  clauses  when 
put  into  indirect  discourse.  I  'have,  therefore,  given  a  separate 
list  of  these  relative  constructions  in  Chap.  XI. 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  II 

I  have  invariably  treated  the  historical  present  as  if  it  were  the 
aorist  or  imperfect  for  which  it  is  used. 

The  treatment  of  reprcesentatio  in  indirect  discourse  is  the  same. 
Presents  and  perfects  depending  on  a  past  are  given  as  if  they  were 
the  imperfects  and  pluperfects  for  which  they  stand. 

Consuevi,  cognovi,  and  similar  verbs  and  participles,  though 
practically  present  in  meaning,  have  been  classified  as  present  per- 
fects, etc. 

Those  result  clauses  in  which  the  tenses  seemed  equivalent  in 
meaning  to  the  corresponding  tenses  of  the  indicative  have  been 
given  a  corresponding  classification.  The  rest  will  be  found  in 
Chap.  VI. 

When  the  "principal  verb"  for  another  verb  is  spoken  of,  the 
principal  verb  of  the  sentence  is,  of  course,  not  necessarily  intended, 
for  a  subordinate  verb  may  have  another  verb  depending  on  it,  and 
be  its  principal  verb. 

Only  subordinate  finite  verbs  are  classified  ;  but  they  may  depend 
on  participles,  infinitives,  and  even  adjectives  and  nouns.  These 
participles  and  infinitives,  etc.,  are  included  according  to  the  same 
headings  as  the  finite  verbs,  so  that  where  a  verb  is  said  to  depend 
on  a  descriptive  imperfect,  for  example,  it  may  be  found  to  depend 
on  a  present  infinitive,  an  adjective,  etc.  Perhaps  this  will  be 
especially  noted  where  a  verb  is  said  to  follow  a  past  future. 

All  through  the  subdivisions  the  capitals  A,  B,  and  C  have  been 
used  to  denote  respectively  independent  indicatives,  dependent  in- 
dicatives, and  dependent  subjunctives. 

No  independent  indicatives  have  intentionally  been  given  unless 
the  relation  between  them  and  the  principal  verb,  if  one  may  call  it 
'so,  is  fairly  clear.  Those  that  are  given  serve  to  show  the  identity 
of  independent  tense  usage  with  dependent. 

The  ratio  of  indicatives  to  subjunctives  in  each  single  category 
is  of  little  consequence  for  my  purpose. 

My  figures  are  the  result  of  counting  all  the  verbs,  rather  than 
the  number  of  sentences  in  which  the  construction  appears. 


12  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

CHAPTER  II. 

THE  DESCRIPTIVE  IMPERFECT  AND   IMPERFECT  OF   REPEATED 

ACTION. 

The  imperfect  of  repeated  action  is  really  only  a  species  of 
descriptive  imperfect;  instead  of  a  single  act  lasting  on  during  or 
up  to  another  we  have  a  series  of  acts  lasting  in  the  same  way. 
As  a  development  of  this  use  the  imperfect  is  occasionally  used  to 
express  repeated  action  in  situations  in  which  but  for  the  idea  of 
repetition  the  aorist  would  have  been  used.  But  in  Caesar,  at  least, 
I  find  no  such  case  outside  of  independent  sentences. 

The  larger  subdivisions  of  this  chapter  are  made  on  the  basis  of 
the  relation  of  the  times  of  the  two  acts  involved  to  each  other. 
The  examples  under  each  of  the  heads  thus  made  are  further  sub- 
divided according  to  the  tense  meaning  of  the  verbs  on  which  they 
depend.  Where  examples  of  the  imperfect  of  repeated  action  exist 
they  are  given  immediately  after  the  corresponding  descriptive 
imperfects. 

I.  '  The  imperfect  describing  an  act  wrhich  began  before  the 
action  of  its  principal  verb  and  continued  after  it. 

i.      The  descriptive  imperfect  following*  an  aorist. 

Example:  I,  n,  2,  cum  se  defendere  non  possent,  legates 
mittunt;  since  they  were  not  able  to  defend  themselves  they  sent 
envoys. 

A.  I,  2,  4;  2,  5;  4,  i;  6,  3;  6,  4;  7,  2;  7,  4  (2);  9,  i  (2);  9,  3  (4);  10,  2;  n, 
i;  12,  i;  12,  4;  18,  i;  19,  i  and  2  (2);  25,  3;  29,  2;  33,  2;  38,  2;  40,  15;  42,  2 
(2);  43,  i  (2);  46,  3;  47,  3;  48,  5;  49,  3;  52,  6.  II,  5,  6;  6,  i;  6,  3;  7,  4;  10,  5; 
X5.  3;  J7>  4;  J9'  I  (2)'  23>  3-  29>  3  (2)-  29>  4-  HI.  i°,  i;  1'1.  2;  16,  3;  17,  i  and  2 
(2);  18,  6;  19,  i;  20,  i.  IV,  4,  2  (2);  6,  4;  9,  3;  u,  4;  13,  2  and  3  (3);  17,  2;  20,  4; 
22,  4;  26,  i;  29,  4  (2).  V,  3,  2;  6,  i;  28,  i  (2);  34,  2  (2);  42,  2  (2);  44,  i  and  2 
(3);  45,  2;  48,  i;  49,  i;  49,  6(2);  57,  i  (2);  58,  4.  VI,  3;  5  (2);  5,  5;  7,  5  (3); 
9,  2  (2);  34,  7;  35,  1(2);  35,  3.  VII,  10,  i;  n,  4;  15,  2;  17,  i;  19,  2(2);  26,  2;  35, 
2;  36,  2-4  (3);  36,  5;  39,  2;  43,  5;  45,  4  (2);  46,  i  (2);  48,  4  (2);  50,  2;  55,  10; 
56,  2;  59,  3  and  4  (3);  62,  i;  62,  5  (4);  65,  i;  73,  i;  76,  5;  77,  i;  79,  3;  83,  2;  83, 
3.  Total,  139.  B.  I,  3,  5  (2);  4,  2;  5,  3;  7,  3;  8,  i;  10,  3;  n,  5;  15,  i;  18,  i; 
19,  3;  21,  4;  23,  i  (2);  25,  5;  25,  6  (2);  28,  3;  28,  5;  32,  i;  39,  2;  42,  5  (2);  51, 
i;  52,  7;  52,  7;  53,  6;  54,  2.  II,  2,  3;  12,  i;  12,  3;  15,  i  (2);  19,  6;  19,  8;  21,  3; 
28,  2;  33,  2;  35,  2.  Ill,  i,  2;  6,  4;  7,  3;  8,  2;  9,  i;  9,  3;  9,  8;  18,  i;  22,  i;  23, 
5;  27,  2;  28,  i;  28,  2  (2).  IV,  12,  i;  13,  5;  13,  6;  20,  i  and  2  (2);  21,  3;  21,  7 
(3);  22,  3;  22,  6;  25,  i;  25,  3;  30,  2;  32,  i;  32,  2;  35,  i;  36,  2.  V,  4,  i;  4,  3  (2); 
9,  7  (2);  u,  5;  22,  i;  23,  2;  23,  5;  24,  4;  33,  5;  37,  i;  38,  i;  41,  i;  46,  i;  47,  2; 
49,  7;  58,  4.  VI,  4,  2;  4,  3;  7,  7;  30,  i;  36,  2;  38,  3.  VII,  i,  2;  4,  2;  5,  2;  7,  4; 
9,  4;  ii,  6;  13,  2;  13,  3  (2);  27,  i;  33,  i;  35,  5;  37,  i;  38,  9;  40,  5;  43,  4;  44,  2; 


*It  is  hardly  necessary  to  say  that  the  word  "following"  is  not  used  here  to  mean  fol- 
lowing in  the  order  of  arrangement,  but  in  the  sense  of  depending  on. 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  13 

47,  i;  47,  4;  47,  7;  54,  2  (2);  55,  7;  60,  2;  61,  4;  63,  7  (3);  64,  7;  65,  4  (2);  70, 
6'.  75.  5;  77-  I2i  83.  4;  84-  4'  87>  3-  Total,  132.  C.  I,  9,  2;  u,  2;  16,  6;  20,  6(3); 
21,  2;  22,  i  (2);  23,  3  (2);  26,  i;  32,  3;  40,  i;  42,  6;  45,  i.  II,  2,  2;  5,  2;  13,  2;  13,  3; 

17,  2;   17,  5;   19,  5;   26,  2  (2);   28,  i;   29,  4.     Ill,    i,  i;    i,   6;   5,    i  (3);   10,    3;   15,  2; 

18,  2;   18,  3;  25,  i  and  2  (5);  26,  i;  29,  2  (2).     IV,   4,  4;  7,  2;   n,  i;   14,   2;   14,   3; 
15,  i;  23,  5;  28,  2  (2);  29,   3;   30,   i   (2);  34,   5;  37,  2;  38,  2.     V,  2,  3;  3,  3;  3,  5; 
10,  2;   18,   5;  22,   4  (2);  33,  3;  37,   5;  44,    3;  47,   5;  48,   2  (2);  49,   8;  56,   5;  58,  6. 
VI,    i,  4;  2,  2;  2,  3;  7,  8;   31,  i;   31,  5;   35,  7;   39,  i.     VII,    i,  3;  2,   2;  6,    i;   n,  5; 
12,  4;   15,  3;   19,  4i  25,  i  (2);  27,  i;  28,  3;   31,  4;   32,  2  (2);   37,  7:  38,  i;  45,  7;  45, 
9;  49,  i;  52,  2;  53,  2;  66,  2;  82,  2;  83,  5;  83,  8;  85,    i;  87,    i;  87,   3.     Total,  m. 

2.  The   imperfect   of   repeated  action  following  an  aorist.      Ex- 
ample:     II,  19,  5,  cum  se  identidem  reciperent,  &c.,  legiones  castra 
munire  coeperunt;    while  they  kept    retreating,    &c.,    the    legions 
began  to  make  a  camp. 

A.  IV,  26,  3  (3);  VII,  59,  i  (3);  73,  i.  Total,  7.  13.  I,  39,  i;  IV,  7,  i; 
V,  i,  5;  2,  4  (3);  VII,  24,  5  (2).  Total,  8.  C.  I,  42,  4;  II,  19,  5  (2);  VII,  25, 
i  (2).  Total,  5. 

3.  The  descriptive  imperfect   following  a  descriptive  imperfect. 
Example:      II,  5,  5,  posteum  quae  essent  tuta  ab  hostibus  reddebat; 
rendered  safe  from  the  enemy  all  that  was  in  his  rear. 

A.  I,  6,  i;  38,  3  (2);  II,  9,  i;  III,  13,  i;  13,  6;  14,  4;  14,  8;  24,  2-3  (2);  IV 
20,  2;  24,  2;  V,  7,  i;  VI,  5,  4  (2);  7,  5;  VII,  19,  i  (2);  59,  5  (3).  Total,  21.  B. 
I,  7.  4;  l6-  5;  38,  3:  U,  19,  SI  23,  4;  24,  3;  III,  9,  3;  14,  3;  14,  9;  17,  7;  25,  i; 
IV,  17,  2;  18,  4;  29,  4;  30,  i;  V,  28,  1(2);  42,  2;  54,  5;  VI,  5,  3;  VII,  26,  2  (2); 
37,  6;  45,  4;  62,  4;  77,  i.  Total,  26.  C.  I,  14,  i;  16,  5;  16,  6;  18,  9;  31,  2;  34, 
4:  35.  2;  39.  6;  4°.  6;  43,  6;  II,  4,  i  (2);  4,  8  (2);  5,  5;  21,  3;  31,  2;  III,  2,  i; 
17,  7;  IV,  7,  4;  7.  5;  8,  3  (3):  20,  4  (5);  32,  i;  V,  27,  4;  27,  9;  29,  7;  31,  5  (2);  33, 
3)  35.  Si  4°.  7!  41'  5'  54-  J'  VI,  10,  i;  36,  2;  VII,  6,  2;  20,  7;  31,2;  52,  3;  89,  2. 
Total,  47. 

4.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  an  imperfect  of  repeated 
action.      Example:      II,    i,    i,    cum  esset   in  Gallia,  crebri  rumores 
afferebantur;  while  he  was  in  Gaul,    rumors  kept  coming  to  him. 

A.  I,  16,  2-3  (3);  II,  22,  2;  III,  12,  i.  Total,  5.  B,  I,  39,  5  (2);  II,  i,  3 
(2);  III,  12,  y,  14,  8;  IV,  31,  2;  VI,  12,  7;  VII,  73,  9;  80,  4.  Total,  10.  C.  I, 
50,  4;  II,  i,  i;  8,  i  (2);  u,  5  (2);  30,  3;  III,  3,  2  (2);  14,  7.  Total,  10. 

5.  The  imperfect  of  repeated  action  following  a  descriptive  im- 
perfect.     Example:      I,  47,  4,  propter   linguae  Gallicae   scientiam, 
qua  Ariovistus  utebatur:   because    of  his  knowledge    of  the  Gallic 
language,  which  Ariovistus  was  in  the  habit  of  using. 

B.  I,  47,  4.     Total,  i. 

6.  The   imperfect   of  repeated   action   following  an  imperfect  of 
repeated   action.       Example:      II,    i,  3-4,    quod    sollicitarentur    ab 
nonnullis  quod  a  potentioribus  vulgo  regna  occupabantur;   because 
they  were  being  constantly  urged  by  some  because  the  royal  power 
was  regularly  siezed  upon  by  stronger  men, 

B.     II,  i,  4.     Total,  i. 


14  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

7.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  a  descriptive  pluperfect, 
and  extending  beyond   both   the  act   and  the  resulting  state.       Ex- 
ample:     II,  11,2,  qua  de  causa  discederent,   nonduin  perspexerat: 
he  had  not^yet  ascertained  why  they  were  leaving. 

A.  Ill,  2,  5;  IV,  23,  3  (2);  V,  6,  2;  18,  3;  VII,  55,  i.  Total,  6.  B.  I,  16,  5; 

11,  12,  2;  22,  i;  29,  4;  32,  4;  35,  3;  III,  2,  3;  2,  4;  6,  2;  7,  i;  20,  3;  26,  2;  26,  6; 
IV,  22,  2  (3);  22,  3;  29,  4;  32,  i;  32,  2;  32,  4;  V,  3,  4;  25,  4;  52,  i  (2);  VI,  4,  5; 
32,  5;  VII,  17,  i;  36,  i;  36,  2;  44,  i;  46,  3;  69,  5;  88,  i.  Total,  34.  C.  I,  31, 
10;  32,  2;  44,  12;  II,  3,  4;  n,  2;  14,  3;  16,  4  (2);  26,  4;  26,  5  (2);  28,  2;  IV, 

12,  i;  19,  3;  V,  29,  6;  58.  i;  VI,  29,  4;  VII,  i,  i;  18,  i;  38,  4;  62,  6.   Total,  21. 

8.  The   descriptive  imperfect  following  a  descriptive  pluperfect 
of  repeated  action.      Example:     III,  14,  6,  cum  funes  qui  antemnas 
ad  malos  destinabant  comprehensi  erant;  whenever  the  ropes  which 
bound  the  sail  yards  to  the  mast  had  been  grappled. 

B.  Ill,  12,  2;  14,  6.     Total,  2. 

9.  The  descriptive  imperfect  of  an    act  whose  time  includes  the 
act  of  a  descriptive  pluperfect  but  not  the  resulting  situation.       Ex- 
ample:    II,    33,    6,     refractis    portis,    cum    iam    defenderet    nemo; 
having    broken    down   the   gates,  since  there    were    no   longer    any 
defenders. 

B.     II,    33,  2.     Ill,    15,  3;   17,  4.     VI,    12,  6;  41,    i.     VII,   8,    i.     Total,  6.     C. 
II,    17,  4;   33,  6.     VI,    12,  2.     Total,  3. 

10.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  an  aoristic  pluperfect 
and  including  the  times  of  both  the  pluperfect  and  its  principal 
verb.      Example:     VII,   47,   2,    milites  non  exaudito    tubae    sono, 
quod  satis  magna  valles  intercedebat  retinebantur;   the  soldiers  not 
having  heard  the  trumpet,  because  quite  a  large  valley  lay  between, 
were  kept  in  their  position. 

A.  I,  18,  10.  Total,  i.  B.  I,  8,  4;  41,  4.  VII,  47,  2.  Total,  3.  C.  II, 
3,  5  (2).  VII,  20,  3;  33,  3  (2).  Total,  5. 

11.  The  descriptive  imperfect  including  the  time  of  an  aoristic 
pluperfect,    but   not   that   of   the   principal  verb   of   the   sentence. 
Example:      I,    13,  5,   quod  adortus  esset  cum  ii  qui  flumen   trans- 
issent  auxilium  ferre  non  possent,  ne  ipsos  despiceret;   because  he 
had  made  his  attack  at  a  time  when  those  across  the  river  could 
not  give  aid,  he  must  not  despise  them. 

B.  I,   40,5.     VII,   20,3.     Total,  2.     C.     (The  disproportion  between  the  num- 
ber of  indicatives  and  subjunctives  is  the  result  of  this  being  a  common  indirect 
discourse  form  of  the  direct  imperfect  following  an  aorist).     I,  13,  5;   14,  2  (2);  20, 
2;  29,   i;  31.  4i  3i.  9;    4°.  5!  43,  5-     V,   10,  2;  27,  6.     VII,  38,  5;  41,  2;  52,  i. 
Total,  14. 

12.  The  imperfect  of  repeated  action  including  the  time  of  an 


THE  SEQUENCE  OF  TENSES  IN  LATIN.  15 

aoristic  pluperfect,  but  not  that  of  the  principal  verb  of  the  sen- 
tence. Example:  VII,  41,  2,  summis  copiis  castra  oppugnata 
dernonstrant,  cum  crebro  integri  defessis  succederent;  they  stated 
that  the  camp  had  been  attacked  by  large  numbers,  with  fresh  men 
continually  taking  the  place  of  tired. 

C.     VII,  41,  2.     Total,  i. 

13.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  an  imperfect  in  result. 
Example:  I],  35,  i,  tanta  opinio  perlata  est  uti  ab  iis  nationibus 
quae  trans  Rhenum  incolerent  mitterentur  legati;  such  a  report 
was  spread  that  envoys  were  sent  by  the  nations  which  lived  across 
the  Rhine. 

B  V,  43,  5;  51,  3,  Total,  2.  C.  (The  preponderance  of  subjunctives  is  due 
to  attraction).  II,  35,  i.  Ill,  15,  4.  V,  23,  3;  23,  4;  44,  13;  53,  i.  VI,  37,  2; 
43,  5.  VII,  36,  4.  Total,  9. 

14.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  a  past  future  and  in- 
cluding the  times  of  both  the  principal  verb  and  the  future  act. 
Example:     I,  6,  3,  Allobrogibus  sese  persuasuros,  quod  viderentur, 
existimabant;   they  thought  they  should  persuade  the  Allobroges, 
because  they  seemed,  etc. 

B.  I,   42,  5.     II,   8,4;   20,  i.     Ill,   9,  3.     IV,   4,  7.     V,  i,  4;  7,  i  and  2  (2);   u, 
4-     VI,   33,  4;   34,   6;   34,   7.     VII,    19,   6;   31,   4;  78,    i;  81,   2  (2).     Total,  17.     C. 
(The  preponderance  of  subjunctives  is  due  to  attraction  and  indirect  discourse). 
I,    3,  i;  6,  3;  7,  3;  7,  5;   14,  6;   15,  i;   17,  2;   17,  3;  20,   4;  21,    i;  28,    i;  31,   2;   31, 
J4:   3i,  15:   33,  4;   34.   2;   34,   3;   36,   7;   37,   2;  40,    i;  40,    13;  40,    i<;  43,  9;  47,    i; 
47,  4;   48,  2;  48,  3       II,   2,  3.      Ill,   6,  i;  8,  5;  21,    i;   26,   3.      IV,   8,    3;   14,    i;   16, 
6;   19,  2;  23,  5;   37,  i.     V,   6,  3  (2);  27,  3;  29,  6;   36,  2;   36,  3;  41,   6;  41,   8;  43,   6; 
46,  3;  51,  2;  52,  6.     VI,    i,  2;  9,  7;   10,  3.     VII,   8,   4;   14,   5;   14,   9;   15,   4;   15,   5; 
19,  5;  26,  3;   30,  4;   33,  2;   37.  7;  71,  i;  72,  2;  75,  i;  77,  2.     Total,  67. 

15.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  a  past  future    perfect 
and  including  the  times  both  of  it  and  the  principal  verb.     Example: 
VII,  39,  4,   quod  futurum  provideat  si  se  tot  hominum  milia  cum 
hostibus  coniunxerint  quorum  salutem   neque  propinqui  neglegere 
— posset;   which  he  saw  would  happen  if  so  many  thousand  should 

join  the  enemy,  whose  safety  their  relatives  could  not  neglect. 

C.  VII,    39,  4.     Total,  i. 

16.  The  imperfect  of  repeated  action  following  a  past  future 
perfect,  and  including   the   times   of  both   of   it   and   the  principal 
verb.      Example:     II,    31,   3,   si  pro  sua  dementia,  quam  ab  aliis 
audirent,  statuisset  Aduatucos  esse  conservandos,  ne  se  armis  des- 
poliaret;   if  in  his  kindness,  of  which  they  used  to  hear,  he  should 
have  decided  to  save  the  lives  of  the  Aduatuci,  let  him  not  take 
away  their  arms. 

C.     II,   31,  3.     Total,  i. 


l6  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

17.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  a  past  future  and  in- 
cluding the  time  of  its  principal  verb,  but  not  that  of  the  future 
event.  Example:  V,  6,  5,  id  esse  consilium,  ut  quos  in  con- 
spectu  Galliae  interficere  vereretur,  hos  in  Britanniam  traductos 
necajet;  this  was  the  plan,  to  kill  in  Britain  those  whom  he  feared 
to  kill  in  Gaul. 

B.  Ill,  ii,  2.  V,  5,  4;  46,  5.  VI,  33,  3;  33,  4.  VII,  21,  3;  56,  2.  Tot^\,  7. 
C.  I,  14,  6;  27,  2.  IV,  ii,  3.  V,  6,  5;  38,  4;  47,  4.  VI,  7,  6;  40,  2.  VII,  6, 
3;  66,  5.  Total,  10. 

II.  The  imperfect  describing  an  act  which  both  began  and 
stopped  at  the  same  time  as  the  action  of  its  principal  verb. 

1.  The  descriptive  imperfect    following  a  summarizing  aorist. 
Example:      I,    15,    5,    ita   dies   XV  iter  fecertmt   ut  inter  hostium 
agmen  et  nostrum  non  amplius  quinis  milibus  passuum  interesset; 
they  marched  for  fifteen  days  in  such  a  way  that  there  were  not 
more  than  five  miles  between  the  two  armies. 

A.     I,   39,  3-4  (2).     VII,    17,  2;  44,  3.     Total,   4.     B.     IV,    i,   2  (2).     V,   39,   4 

(2);   50,  2.     VII,  40,  2.     Total,  6.     C.     I.    15,  5.     II,    ii,  i  (2);   33,  4.     Ill,  15,  3; 

17,  6;  21,  i  (2);  29,  2  (2)..    IV,    16,  i;  21,  9;  29,  i;   31,  3;   34,  4  (2).  V,    16,  i;   18, 
5;  31,  4;  58,  i.     VII,   24,  i;  28,  4;  30,  4;  63,  7  (2).     Total,  25. 

2.  The  imperfect  of  repeated  action  following  a  summarizing 
aorist.      Example:      II,    ii,   4,   multitudinem  conciderunt,   cum   ab 
extreme  agmine  consisterent,  etc. ;  they  killed  many,  since  those  in 
the  rear  would  keep  making  a  stand,  etc. 

A.  I,  39,  3-6  (6).  Ill,  3,  3.  Total,  7.  B.  I,  26,  3  (3).  Total,  3.  C.  II, 
ii,  4  (3);  27,  3  (4);  33,  4.  V,  33,  6;  55,  2.  VI,  24,  i  (3).  Total,  13. 

3.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  a  descriptive  imperfect. 
Example:      I,  2,  4,    his  rebus  fiebat  ut  minus  facile  finitimis  bellum 
inferre  possent;   the  result  was  that  they  were  able,  etc. 

A.  I,  2,  4;  6,  i;  19,  3;  33,  2;  33,  3-4  (3);  48,  5-7  (2).  II,  6,  3;  18,  1-3  (5); 
19,  2-3  (3).  HI,  9,  4~7  (3):  10,  i.  IV,  13,  i;  17,  i;  31,  i.  V,  16,  4;  24,  7.  VI, 
34,  3;  34,  4-5  (6).  VII,  6,  3  (2).  Total,  37.  B.  I,  2,  5;  33,  2  (2);  46,  3;  52,  7. 
II,  8,  2  (4);  19,  2;  20,  3.  Ill,  2,  5  (2);  24,  2,  IV,  22,  4;  24,  2  (4);  26,  i.  V,  34, 
2;  4g,  6.  VI,  12,  2  (2);  36,  i  (2);  43,  6.  VII,  15,  2  (2);  17,  2  (2);  50,  2;  56, 
2,  80,  2;  80,  5  (2).  Total.  36.  C.  I,  2,  2;  2,  4;  3,  6;  6,  i  (2);  14,  3;  14,  4  (2); 
17,  i  (2);  18,  3;  19,  i  (2);  23,  i;  29,  2;  30,  4;  32,  2;  32,  4;  32,  5;  35,  2  (3);  36,  2;  36,  4; 
38,  4;  4o,  8;  40,  10  (2);  42,  2;  43,  8;  44,  4  (2);  44,  8;  45,  3  (2).  II,  i,  2;  4,  3;  5, 
5;  6,  3;  15,  4;  17,  4;  18,  2;  20,  3;  22,  i;  22,  2;  25,  i;  29,  3.  Ill,  14,  4;  14,  8;  17, 
5  (2);  20,  i;  28,  i.  IV,  7,  5;  8,  2;  16,  4;  16,  7;  23,  3;  23,  5;  29,  4.  V,  4,  i;  6,  5; 
ii,  2;  16,  i  (2);  26,  4;  27.  3:  41,  5  (3);  42,  3;  44,  i;  57,  i.  VI,  i,  3;  12,  9  (2); 
32,  i;  34,  i;  35,  3!  36,  2.  VII,  i,  7  (2);  n,  4;  14,  3  (2);  14,  10;  19,  4;  19,  5;  20, 
5;  20,  7;  24,  4;  29,  3;  32,  3  (2);  33,  2;  35,  i;  37,  3;  37,  6;  41,  2;  45,  4;  47,  3;  52, 
3;  57,  4  (2);  64,  2;  72,  i;  76,  5;  77,  i;  80,  4  (2);  85,  2.  Total,  113. 

4.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  an  imperfect  of  repeated 
action.      Example:      I,    32,    5,     Ariovisti     crudelitatem    horrerent, 


THE  SEQUENCE  OF  TENSES  IN  LATIN.  IJ 

quod  reliquis  fugae  facultas  daretur,  etc. ;  they  used  to  shudder  at 
the  cruelty  of  Ariovistus,  because  the  rest  had  a  chance  to  flee,  etc. 

A.  Ill,  4,  3;  13,  6-7  (3).  Total,  4.  B.  Ill,  12,  3.  VII,  25,  1(2).  Total,  3. 
C.  I,  32,  5  (2).  V,  33,  i  Total,  3. 

5.  The  imperfect  of  repeated  action  following  a  descriptive  im- 
perfect.     Example:      I,    2,   4,   his  rebus    fiebat    ut  vagarentur;   the 
result  of  all  this  was  that  they  were  in  the  habit  of  roaming  about, 
etc. 

A.  I,  48,  5-6  (4).     IV,   31,  2  (3).     Total,  7.     B.     I,  25,   3.     Ill,  4,   3  (2).     IV, 

26,  i.  VI,  36,  i.     Total,  5.     C.     I,  2,  4;  6,  i;  32,  4;  48,  7;  50,  4.     II,  i,  3.     Ill, 

12,  i;  13,  7  (3);  14,  4;   17,  5.     IV,  24,  3  (2).     V,  16,  4  (4);   19,   3  (2).     VII,   14,  6; 

35,  i.  Total  22. 

6.  The  imperfect  of  repeated  action  following  an  imperfect  of 
repeated  action  (not  including  the  cases  where  each  act  of  one  verb 
is  related  to  an  act  of  the  other;  cf.  Chap.  VII).     Example:    V,  16, 
2,   intellectum    est    equites    magno    cum    periculo    dimicare,   quod 
cederent,  etc.;   it  was  found  that  the  cavalry  fought  at  great  risks, 
because  the  enemy  would  retreat,  etc. 

A.  I,  39,  i.  Ill,  4,  4;  13,  6  (2).  Total,  4.  B.  VII,  16,  3.  Total  i.  C. 
Ill,  12,  i.  V,  16,  2  (3),  Total,  4. 

7.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  a  descriptive  pluperfect. 
Example:     I,  13,  2,   comrnoti,  cum  intellegerent,  etc.;  smitten  with 
fear,  because  they  understood,  etc. 

A.  V,  6,  2  (2).  Total,  2.  B.  Ill,  19,  2.  V,  7,  3;  9,  i.  VII,  43,  3;  77,  2. 
Total,  5.  C.  I,  13,  2;  14,  2;  27,  4;  31,  10;  33,  5;  39,  3.  II,  17,  4;  25,  i;  25,  3; 
32,  4,  III,  2,  2.  IV,  17,  7;  32,  i  (2).  V,  17,  3;  35,  5;  54,  5.  VI,  43,  3.  VII, 
X7.  3;  47-  4;  54-  4;  55-  10;  56-  4-  Total,  23. 

8.  The  imperfect  of  repeated  action  following  a  descriptive  plu- 
perfect.     Example:     V,   55,  4,   tantam  auctoritatem  comparaverat 
ut  ad  eum  legationes  concurrerent;   he  had  acquired  such  power 
that  envoys  kept  coming  to  him. 

A.  V,  53,  4  (4).  Total,  4.  B.  VI,  36,  2.  VII,  73,  i.  Total,  2.  C.  V,  55, 
4  (2).  Total,  2. 

9.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  an   imperfect  in  result. 
Example:     V,  43,  4,   tanta  militum  virtus  fuit  ut,  cum  flamma  tor- 
rerentur  de  vallo  decederet  nemo;  such  was  the  bravery  of  the  sol- 
diers that,  although  they  were  scorched  by  the  flames,  no  one  left 
the  rampart. 

C.     V,  43,  4  (3).     Total,  3. 

III.  The  imperfect  describing  an  act  which  lasted  up  to  the  time 
of  its  principal  verb  (most  of  these  could  have  been  replaced  by  the 
pluperfect). 


1 8  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  , 

1.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  an  aorist.      Example:      I, 
4,  3,   cum   civitas  ius  suum  exsequi.  conaretur,  Orgetorix  mortuus 
est;  while  the  state  was  trying  to  execute  its  laws,  Orgetorix  died. 

A.  II.  9,  1-2  (3).  Ill,  24,  1-4  (4).  IV,  24,  4.  V,  25,  i;  32,  i;  35,  5  (2).  VI, 
8,  2.  VII,  37,  6;  80,  2-5  (3).  Total,  17.  B.  I,  10,  3.  IV,  29,  3;  34,  3.  V, 
33,  6;  40,  2;  43,  6.  VI,  8,  6;  8,  7;  29,  2;  VII,  3,  i;  8,  2;  65,  5.  Total,  12.  C. 

I,  4,  3  (2);  20,  5;  53,  5.  Ill,  7,  i;  24,  5.  IV,  12,  5;  37,  i.  V,  30,  i.  VII,  24,  2 
(3);  50,  i  (2);  51,  i;  80,  6.  Total,  16. 

2.  The    imperfect    of    repeated     action     following    an     aorist. 
Example:     I,  32,  3,   cum  ab  his   saepius  quaereret,  Divitiacus  re- 
spondit;  on  his  repeatedly  questioning  them,  Divitiacus  replied. 

A.     VII,  25,  2;  80,  3-4  (2).     Total,  3.     C.     I,   32,  3.     Total,  i. 

3.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  an  imperfect.      Example: 

II,  24,  i,   cum  se  in  castra  reciperent,  adversis  hostibus  occurrebant: 
while  retreating  to  camp  they  met  the  enemy  face  to  face. 

C.     II,  24,  i.     Total,  i. 

4.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  a  descriptive  pluperfect. 
Example:     II,  29,  i,  cum  venirent  hac  pugna  nuntiata  reverterunt; 
having  heard  of  this  battle  while  they  were  on  the  way,  they  went 
home. 

A.  VII,  25,  3;  36,  5-6  (2).  Total,  3.  B.  VI,  30,  2.  VII,  8,  3.  Total,  2   C. 
II,  29,  i;  IV,  28,  3.  Total,  2. 

5.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  an  aoristic  pluperfect. 
Example:     II,  4,  2,   Gallos  qui  ea  loca  incolerent  expulisse;  had 
driven  out  the  Gauls  who  were  living  there. 

B.  Ill,  17.  3.     VII,  4,  i;  68,  3.     Total,  3.     C.     II,  4,  2.     Total,  i. 

6.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  a  past  future,  and  last- 
ing up    to    the    future    event.     Example:     I,   35,   3,   obsides  quos 
haberet  ab  Aeduis  redderet;  he  was  to  return  the  Aeduan  hostages 
whom  he  was  holding. 

.  B.     I,  7,  2.     II,  9,  4;  9,  5.     Total,  3.    C.     I,   35,  3  (2).     IV,  n,  4;   16,  5.    VII, 
17,  4;  29,  6.     Total,  6. 

IV.  The  imperfect  describing  an  act  which  began  at  the  time  of 
its  principal  verb  and  continued  beyond  it. 

i.  The  imperfect  following  an  aorist.  Example:  VII,  72,  i, 
fossam  derectis  lateribus  duxit,  lit  eius  fossae  solum  tantundem 
pateret,  etc.;  he  dug  a  ditch  with  vertical  sides,  so  that  the  bottom 
was  as  wide  as  the  top. 

A.     II,  5,  5  (3).     Total,  3.     C.     IV,  31,  3.     VII,  72,  i.     Total,  2. 

V.  The  imperfect  describing  an  act  which  began  after  the  action 
of  its  principal  verb  began  and  ended  before  it  ended.. 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  J9 

1.  The  descriptive  imperfect  following  a  descriptive  imperfect. 
Example:     I,  44,  9,   non  tarn  barbarum  esse  ut  non  sciret;  he  was 
not  so  much  of  a  barbarian  that  he  was  ignorant,  etc. 

B.     II,  7,  4;  17,  4.     Total,  2.     C.     1,44,9.     V,  27,4.     VII,  69,   i.     Total,   3. 

2.  The    descriptive    imperfect    following    the    descriptive    plu- 
perfect:    Example:     III,   9,   6,   neque  eorum  locorum  ubi  bellum 
gesturi  essent  vada  novisse;  and  they  had  not  become  acquainted 
with  the  shoals  of  the  places  in  which  they  were  about  to  fight. 

B.     V,  9,  4,     Total,  i.     C.     Ill,  9,  6.     Total  i. 
Totals  for  Chapter,  A,  274;  B,  335;  C,  546. 

CHAPTER  III. 

THE   DESCRIPTIVE   PLUPERFECT. 

Since  this  is  equally  a  descriptive  tense,  it  naturally  may  be  classi- 
fied under  much  the  same  larger  and  smaller  subdivisions  as  the 
imperfect.  Probably  no  two  men  would  agree  on  the  classification 
of  some  of  the  examples  that  lie  between  the  descriptive  and  aoristic 
pluperfects,  for  there  is  no  sharp  line  between  them,  just  as  there 
is  none  between  the  perfect  and  the  aorist.  Almost  every  act  that 
has  taken  place  before  another  has  left  some  influence  behind  it, 
and  hence  might  be  called  descriptive.  On  the  other  hand,  even 
where  the  resulting  situation  still  lasts  on,  the  thought  of  the  writer 
may  dwell  strongly  on  the  priority  of  the  act,  and  the  tense  might 
be  called  aoristic.  I  have  tried  to  steer  as  fair  a  course  as  possible 
between  them;  and  even  if  others  should  take  exception  to  my 
general  conception  of  the  difference  between  them,  I  have  at  least 
treated  the  indicative  and  subjunctive  alike. 

I.  The  pluperfect  describing  a  situation  which  began  before  the 
action  of  its  principal  verb  and  continued  after  it. 

i.  The  pluperfect  following  an  aorist.  Example:  I,  27,  3, 
servos  qui  ad  eos  perfugissent  poposcit;  he  demanded  the  slaves 
who  had  fled  to  them. 

A.  I,  ii,  i  (2);  39,  7;  40,  15.  II,  8,  5;  14,  i;  23,  i.  Ill,  7,  2;  17,  2;  17,  4. 
IV,  6,  4;  9,  3;  14,  5  (2);  18,  4  (3);  29,  4.  V,  5,  4;  6,  i;  8',  6  (2);  42,  2,  VI,  32, 
5;  36,  3:  38,  i  (2).  VII,  36,  2;  39,  i;  46,  3  (2);  62,  i:  65,  i;  76,  i  (3).  Total,  36. 
B.  I,  5,  4  (2);  8,  i;  8,  3;  10,  3;  12,  2;  21,  2;  22,  5;  24,  3;  29,  i;  43,  2  (2);  49,  i; 
49,  4;  52,  2;  53,  4  (2);  53,  6.  II,  10,  3;  10,  5;  n,  6;  19,  5;' 19,  6  (3);  23,  i;  33, 
2  (3);  33,  7-  HI,  6,  i;  6,  4  (2);  n,  5;  17,  i;  19,  4;  26,  2;  28,  i.  IV,  4,  6;  6,  i; 
ii,  i;  ii,  6;  15,  4;  16,  2(2);  21,  4;  21,  7;  28,  i;  30,  i;  38,  i  (2);  38,  3.  V,  i,  i; 
i,  2;  7,  9;  8,  2;  ii,  i;  23,  2;  24,  i;  24,  4;  25,  5;  28,  i;  40,  2;  42,  5;  43,  i;  47,  3; 
48,  7;  52,  4;  53,  3;  53,  6.  VI,  30,  i,  32,  6.  35,  6  (2);  35,  10;  36,  3;  36,  4;  37,  9; 
40,  6  (2);  44,  3.  VII,  i,  i;  5,  3;  7;  5;  9,  6  (2);  ii,  8;  12,  4;  13,  i;  20,  9  (2);  26, 
i;  30,  i  (3):  31-  3;  3i,  5!  35,  4:  35-  5:  38-  4;  45,  7;  50,  i;  50,  4:  5i.  i:  51-  2;  60, 


2Q  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

i;  60,  4;  61,  i;  62,  3;  62,  10;  65,  4  (2);  66,  i;  67,  5;  71,  5;  71,  7;  79,  i;  84,  i;  85, 
6;  86,  4;  87,  2.  Total,  122.  C.  I,  7,  i;  16,  6;  22,  i;  27,  3;  38,  i;  40,  i;  47,  6; 
52,  7.  II,  3,  i;  6,  4;  13,  2;  13,  3;  24,  4;  26,  i;  26,  5.  Ill,  2,  i  (2);  3,  i  (2);  5,  i 
(2);  7,  i;  24,  5;  28,  3  (2).  IV,  6,  2;  12,  6;  15,  i;  16,  3;  21,  9;  23,  2;  23,  5;  25,  6; 
26,  4;  32,  3;  37,  i.  V,  i,  6;  2,  2;  9,  T;  15,  4;  17,  2;  18,  2;  22,  4;  31,  6;  32,  2; 
36,  i;  37,  i;  47,  4;  54,  2  (2).  VI,  i,  4;  3,  4;  44,  3.  VII,  7,  4;  9,  5;  n,  i;  12,  3; 
12,  6;  18,  i;  20,  i;  32,  2;  33,  3  (2);  40,  3;  44,  i;  48.  3;  54,  3;  55,  4  (2);  57,  4;  61, 
i;  62,  6;  62,  8.  Total,  74. 

2.  The  descriptive  pluperfect  following  a  descriptive  imperfect. 
Example:     I,  37,  2,  questum  quod  Harudes,  qui  nuper  transportati 
essent,  fines  eorum  popularentur;  to  complain  because  the  Harudes, 
who  had  recently  been  brought  over,  were  ravaging  their  country. 

A.  II,  16,  2.  Ill,  13,  1-4  (7);  14,  3.  IV,  32,  5  (2).  VI,  5,  4.  Total,  12.  B. 
I,  16,  3;  19,  2;  22,  3;  28,  5;  48,  5.  II,  17,  4;  19,  3.  Ill,  14,  3;  17,  2;  18,  6.  IV, 
12,  i  (2);  2|,  4;  29.  2;  30,  i.  V,  i,  i;  6,  2;  23.  4;  24,  7;  47,  2.  VI,  35,  i;  40,  4. 
VII,  8,  3;  36,  3;  44,  3;  47,  2;  50,  2;  55,  10;  56,  2;  61,  2.  Total,  30.  C.  I,  13, 
5;  16,  6;  18,  8  (2);  31,  10;  34,  4;  37,  2;  40,  5;  42,  i;  44,  2;  52,  6  (2).  II,  14,  3; 
24,  2  (2).  Ill,  9,  3;  17,  5.  IV,  7,  3;  13,  3;  32,  i.  V,  27,  7.  VII,  20,  6;  33,  i. 
Total,  23. 

3.  The  descriptive  pluperfect  following  an  imperfect  of  repeated 
action.      Example:     IV,  u,  2,   cum  id  non  impetrassent  petebant, 
etc.;   when  they  had  failed  to  secure  this  they  kept  entreating,  etc. 

A.  VI,  43,  3;  80,  3.  Total,  2.  B.  IV,  16,  5  (3);  31,  2.  VII,  80,  4;  81,  6. 
Total,  6.  C.  I,  16,  i.  II,  15,  5(2);  16,  i.  Ill,  3,  2.  IV,  n,  2.  VII,  78,  4. 
Total,  7. 

4.  The  descriptive  pluperfect  following  a  descriptive  pluperfect 
and  including  the  resulting  situation  as  well  as  the  act.      Example: 
III,   22,    3,   eo  interfecto  cuius  se  amicitiae  devovisset;  when  the 
man  had  been  killed  to  whose  service  he  had  bound  himself. 

A.  IV,  29.  i.     V,  6,  3;   18,  3.     VII,  12,  2;   55,  2-3  (2).     Total,  6.     B.     II,  8,  5; 
26,  i.     Ill,  23,  2.     IV,  12,  6;   15,  5;  29,  2;  35,  i.     V,  i,  9;  6,  i;  9,  4;   15,   3.     VI, 
3,  4;  35,  10.     VII,  27,  i;   35,  3;   39,  r;   57,  i;   58,  4;   58,  6;  63,  3;  88,  i  (2).     Total, 
22.     C.     II,  23,  4.     Ill,  22,  3.     IV,    13,  5  (2).     VI,  10,  4.     VII,  18,   i.     Total,  6. 

5.  The  descriptive  pluperfect  following  a  descriptive  pluperfect 
and  including  the  act  but  not  the   resulting  situation.      Example: 
VII,    n,   8,    perpaucis    desideratis    quod    pontis   angustiae   multi- 
tudinis  fugam  intercluserant;  having  failed  to  capture  very  few,  be- 
cause the  narrowness  of  the  bridge  had  put  a  check  to  the  flight 
of  so  great  a  number. 

B.  II,  24,  2.     VII,  ii,  8.     Total,  2. 

6.  The  descriptive  pluperfect  following   an   aoristic  pluperfect 
and  including  the  time  of  that  pluperfect  but  not  of  its  principal 
verb.      Example:     I,    12,    5;  hie    pagus,    cum    domo    exisset,    L. 
Cassium  interfecerat;  this  canton,  when   it  had  left  its  home,  had 
killed  L.  Cassius. 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  21 

A.  II,  27,  5.     Total,  i.     B.     I,  29,  3.     V,  54,  2.     VII,  9,  i.     Total,  3.     C.     I, 
12,  5.     IV,  27,  5.     V,  22,  2.     VII,  20,  4.     Total,  4. 

7.  The  descriptive  pluperfect  following  an  imperfect  in  result. 
Example:     V,  39,  2,   accidit  ut  nonnulli   milites,   qui  in   silvas  dis- 
cessissent,  interciperentur;  it  happened  that  several  soldiers,  who 
had  gone  off  into  the  woods,  were  caught. 

B.  V,  43,  5.     Total,  i.     C.     V,  39,  2.     VI,  41,  2.     Total,  2. 

8.  The  descriptive  pluperfect  following  a  past  future  and  in- 
cluding both  the  time  of  the  principal  verb  and  that  of  the  future 
event.      Example:     I,    13,   7,   ne  committeret  ut  is  locus  ubi  con- 
stitissent  ex  calamitate  nomen  caperet;  he  should  not  let  the  place 
on  which  they  were  standing  (had  taken  their  stand)  become  famous 
from  a  disaster. 

B.  I,  5,  i;  7,  5;  24,  3;  28,  4.     Ill,  i,  2;  8,  4.      IV,  6,  5;.  22,  5.     V,  2,    3;  5,   4; 
8,  3;   10,  i;  25,  4.     VI,  5,  2.     Total  14.     C.     I,  13,  7.     II,  14,  5.     Ill,   4,  i.     IV, 
ii,  2;   16,  3      V,  4,  3;  38,  2;   52,  6.     VII,  72,  2.     Total  9. 

9.  The  descriptive  pluperfect   following  a  past  future  and  in- 
cluding the  time  of  its  principal  verb  but  not  that  of  the  future  event. 
Example:      IV,  n,  i,   neque  legates   audiendos   arbitrabatur  ab  iis 
qui  bellum  intulissent;  he  thought  that  envoys  from  those  who  had 
made  war  were  not  to  be  listened  to. 

C.  II,  31,  5.     IV,  7,  4;   ii,  i.     VI,  32,  2;  43,   3.     Total,  5.  ' 

II.  The  pluperfect  describing  a  situation  which  both  began  and 
ended  at  the  same  time  as  the  action  of  its  principal  verb. 

1.  The  pluperfect  following  a  summarizing  aorist.      Example: 
V,  54,  3,   cum  iussisset  dicto  audientes  non  fuerunt;  when  he  had 
given  orders  they  did  not  obey. 

B.     I,  26,  3.     II,  ii,  2.     Total,  2.     C.     V,  54,  3.     Total,  i. 

2.  The  descriptive  pluperfect  following  a  descriptive  imperfect. 
Example:     III,  20,  i,   cum  in  Aquitaniam  pervenisset,  diligentiam 
adhibendam  intellegebat;  when  he  had  reached  Aquitania  he  was 
conscious  that  care  was  needed. 

A  I,  33,  5.  II,  19,  3-  HI,  2,  2.  IV,  17,  i.  Total,  4.  B.  I,  9,  3;  16,  3;  18, 
10;  48,  5.  II,  18,  i.  IV,  31,  i  (2)  V  45,  2  (2);  48,  i;  50,  2.  VI,  12,  6.  VII, 
46,  2;  61,  i.  Total,  14.  C.  I,  32,  5.  Ill,  20,  i.  VII,  62,  4.  Total,  3. 

3.  The  descriptive  pluperfect  following  a  descriptive  pluperfect. 
Example:      I,  31,  10,    sed  peius  Sequanis  accidisse,  quod  in  eorum 
finibus  consedisset;   but  a  worse  fate  had  befallen  the  Sequani  be- 
cause he  had  settled  in  their  country. 

A.  V,  9,  4;  ii,  9.  Total,  2.  B.  111,2,3.  Total,!.  C.  1,14,7;  31,10(2). 
II,  4,  4.  VII,  54,  4.  Total  5. 


22  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

4.  The  descriptive  pluperfect  following  a  summarizing  aoristic 
pluperfect.  Example:  VII,  5,  4,  cum  ad  flumen  venissent,  paucos 
dies  ibi  morati  domum  revertuntur;  when  they  had  reached  the 
river,  after  stopping  a  few  days  they  returned  home. 

C.     VII,  5,  4;  20,  6.     Total,  2. 

III.  The  pluperfect  describing  a  situation  which  lasted  up  to 
the  time  of  its  principal  verb. 

1.  The   descriptive  pluperfect  following  an  aorist.      Example: 
V,  26,  3,   cum  nostri  arma  cepissent  hostes  suos  reduxerunt;  when 
our  men  had  rushed  to  arms  the  enemy  retreated. 

A.  IV,  27,  3  (2).  V,  25,  2.  Total,  3.  B.  I.  25,  6;  54,  i.  II,  24,  4.  Ill, 
20;  4.  IV,  38,  3.  V,  17,  5;  53,  2;  58,  7.  VI,  31,  5;  40,  7.  VII,  3,  i;  42,  5;  48; 

49,  i;  62,  8;  68,  i;  71,  8;  80,  9;  81,  4.  Total,  19.  C.  V,  26,  3  (3).  Total,  3. 

2.  The  descriptive  pluperfect  following  a  descriptive  imperfect. 
Example:     VII,   50,   3,    Fabius    quique    una    murum    ascenderant 
praecipitabantur;   Fabius  and  those  who  had  climbed  the  wall  with 
him  were  thrown  down. 

B.  VII,  50,  3.     Total,  i. 

3.  The  descriptive  pluperfect  following  a  descriptive  pluperfect. 
Example:     III,  22,  4,   cum  ad  arma  concurrissent,  repulsus  tamen 
impetravit;  when  they  had  rushed  to  arms,  he,  though  beaten  back, 
yet  obtained,  etc. 

A.  Ill,  16,  2  (2).  IV,  32,  4.  Total,  3.  B.  VII,  46,  5.  Total,  i.  C.  Ill, 
22,  4  (2).  V,  8,  6;  27;  2.  Total,  4. 

4.  The  descriptive  pluperfect  following  an  aoristic  pluperfect. 
Example:      II,   23,    3,    profligatis    Viromanduis,    quibuscum    erant 
congressi;  having  put  to  flight    the  Viromandui,   whom  they  had 
encountered. 

B.  II,  23,  3.     VII,  55,  5.   'Total,  2. 

5.  The  descriptive  pluperfect   following  an  imperfect  in  result. 
Example:     II,  27,  i,   tanta  commutatio  est  facta   ut  nostri,   etiam 
qui    procubuissent,    proelium    redintegrarent;    such   a  change   was 
effected  that  our  men,  even  those  who  had  fallen  to  the  ground,  re- 
newed the  battle. 

C.  II,  27,  i.     Total,  .1. 

6.  The  descriptive  pluperfect  following  a  past  future,  its  situa- 
tion lasting  up  to  the  future  event.      Example:     III,  8,  2,   se   ob- 
sides  quos  Crasso  dedissent  reciperaturos  existimabant;  they  thought 
they  should  recover  the  hostages  whom  they  had  given  to  Crassus. 
B.     II,  20,  i.     VII,  70,  5.     Total,  2.     C.     Ill,  8,  2.     Total,  i. 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  23 

IV.  The  pluperfect  describing  a  situation  which  began  after  the 
action  or  state  of  its  principal  verb  began  and  stopped  before  it 
stopped. 

i.  The  descriptive  pluperfect  following  a  descriptive  imperfect. 
Example:  II,  8,  2,  is  collis  ubi  castra  posita  erant  patebat,  etc.; 
the  hill  where  the  camp  had  been  pitched  stretched,  etc. 

A.     II,  29,  3.     Total,  i.     B.     II,  8,  2.     Total,  i. 
Totals  for  chapter,   A,  79;  B,  243;  C,  150. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE    AOR1STIC   PLUPERFECT. 

The  aoristic  pluperfect  is  divided  into  three  large  groups,  accord- 
ing as  the  act  is  simply  over  and  done  with  before  the  time  of  the 
principal  verb,  or  is  parallel  with  the  action  of  that  verb,  or  lasts 
up  to  the  time  of  that  verb.  The  last  case  may  seem  at  first  sight 
to  be  the  same  as  the  descriptive  pluperfect  which  lasts  up  to  the 
time  of  the  principal  verb;  but  this  is  not  the  case.  "When  they 
had  built  the  wall  the  enemy  destroyed  it"  is  descriptive  pluperfect, 
the  result  of  the  past  act  lasting  up  to  the  destruction;  but  "al- 
though he  had  been  ill  he  recovered"  is  aoristic,  the  state  not  re- 
sulting from  a  past  act. 

I.  The  pluperfect  of  an  act  which  simply  preceded  the  act  of  its 
principal  verb. 

1.  The  aoristic  pluperfect  following  an   aorist.     Example:     I, 
19,  4,   simul  commonefacit  quae  sint  dicta;   he  told  him  what  had 
been  said. 

A.  I,  12,  5  (2).  VI,  3,  5.  VII.  39,  2.  Total,  4.  B.  I,  3,  4  (2);  5,  4;  12,  6; 
12,  7;  13,  2;  18,  2;  21,  3;  21,  4;  26,  i;  28,  i;  31,  i;  41,  4;  43,  9;  47,  2.  II,  5,  4; 
6,  4;  34.  Ill  23,  5;  29,  3.  IV,  4,  3;  12,  4;  36,  2;  37,  i.  VI,  ii,  7;  20,  i;  27,  i; 
35.  6;  37,  4.  VI,  4,  i;  8,  8;  9,  3;  .9,  6  (2);  37,  i;  41,  i;  42,  3;  44,  2.  VII,  4,  i 
(2);  4,  4;  31,  4;  31,  5;  38,  4;  58,  2;  67,  7  (3);  78,  3;  81,  4.  Total,  50.  C.  I,  19, 
4  (2);  27,  2  (4);  41,  2;  43,  4;  46,  4  (3).  IV,  15,  3;  25,  4;  23,  6;  26,  2  (2);  44,  4;  52, 
3.  VI,  37,  8.  VII,  3,  3;  41,  2;  50,  4;  52,  i  (3);  53,  3;  54,  3.  Total,  27. 

2.  The  aoristic  pluperfect  following  a  descriptive  imperfect.     Ex- 
ample:     I,    1-4,  i,   eo  gravius  ferre  quo  minus  merito  accidissent; 
he  was  the  more  angry  about  it  as  it  had  been  done  without  provo- 
cation. 

B.  II,  i,  3;   19,  i;  20,  3;  24,  i;   35,  3.     IV,    12,  i;  38,  2.     V,   25,  i.     VI,   9,  2. 
VII,  24,  2;  30.  2;  53,  i.     Total,  12.    C.    I,  14,  i  (2);   17,  6;   19,  i  (3);  20,  2;  22,  2; 
23,  3;  40,  6;  40,  7  (2);  42, .1;  42,  2;  42,  6;  44,  6  (3);  45,  3.     II,   4,    2.     Ill,   28,    i. 
IV,  8,  2.     V,  27,  2  (2);  28,  4;  33,  2  (2).    VII,  32,  4;  52,  2;  52,  3;  62,  2.    Total,  31. 


24  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

3.  The  aoristic  pluperfect  following  a  descriptive    pluperfect. 
Example:      II,  4,  4,   quod  quantam  quisque  multitudinem   in  con- 
cilio  pollicitus  sit  cognoverint;  because  they  had  learned  how  large 
a  number  each  had  promised  in  the  council. 

A.  VII,  76.  i.  Total,  i.  B.  I,  13,  2;  15,  3.  II,  7,  T;  12,  5  (2);  25,2;  33,3. 

III,  2,  i;  6,  2.  IV,  12,  i;  19,  4;  29,  2.  V.  4,  2;  5,  2;  25,  2;  41,  2;  57,  2;  58,  i. 
VI,  i,  4;  38,  i;  39,4.  VII,  9,  4;  47,  i;  49,  3;  58,  5;  68,  3.  Total,  26.  C.  I, 
29,  i;  30,  2;  31,  7.  II,  4,  4;  14,  3.  VII,  20,  i  (4).  Total,  9. 

4.  The    aoristic    pluperfect    following    an    aoristic    pluperfect. 
Example:     I,    22,    4,    cognovit   Considium   quod   non   vidisset   re- 
nuntiasse;  he  learned  that  Considius  had  reported  a  thing  he  had 
not  seen. 

B.  V,  2,  3;  5,  2;  8,  6;  20,   i  (2);  54,   2.     Total,  6.     C.     I,   22,  4;  40,  6.     IV, 
27,  5.     VI,  31,  5;  42,  i.     Total,  5. 

5.  The    aoristic    pluperfect    following   an    imperfect   in   result. 
Example:     V,  53,  i,    incredibili  celeritate   fama  perpertur,  ut  cum 
post    horam     nonam     pervenisset,    ante     mediam    noctem    clamor 
oreretur;  the  news  was  carried    so  swiftly  that,   although  he  had 
arrived  after  the  ninth  hour,  an  outcry  was  made  before  midnight. 

B.     IV,  28,  2.     Total,  i.     C.     V,  53,  i.     Total,  i. 

6.  The  aoristic  pluperfect  following  a  past  future  and  preceding 
the  time  of  its  principal  verb.     Example:     I,  13,  5,   quod  improvise 
unum    pagum  adortus  esset  ne  ipsos  despiceret;    because  he  had 
caught  one  canton  off  its  guard  he  must  not  despise  them. 

B.  I,  3,  4;  28,  3,  (2);  47,  4.  IV,  35,  i.  VII,  12,  3.  Total,  6.  C.  I,  13,  5: 
31,  14;  33,  4;  35,  4;  40,  9;  43,  8;  44,5;  47,  i  (2).  II,  32,  2.  Ill,  3,  3;  20,  i  (2). 

IV,  13,  5;  22,  i.    V,  7,  7.    VI,  i,  2.    VII,  i,  8;   17,  7;  38,  10;  47,  5;  53,  i.    Total, 

22. 

II.  The  summarizing  aoristic  pluperfect  of  an  act  which  both 
began  and  ended  at  the  same   time  as  the  action  of  its  principal 
verb. 

i.  The  aoristic  pluperfect  following  a  descriptive  imperfect. 
Example:  VII,  83,  2,  erat  collis  quern  circumplecti  non  potuerant 
nostri;  there  was  a  hill  which  our  men  had  not  been  able  to 
enclose. 

B.     VII,  83,  2.     Total,  i. 

III.  The  summarizing  aoristic  pluperfect  of  an  act  which  lasted 
up  to  the  action  of  its  principal  verb. 

i.  The  aoristic  pluperfect  following  an  aorist.  Example:  I, 
26,  4,  diu  cum  esset  pugnatum  castris  potiti  sunt;  when  they  had 
fought  for  a  long  time  they  took  the  camp. 

B.     I,  17,  i.     IV,  26,  5.     Total,  2.     C.     I,  26,  4;  26,  5.     Ill,  28,  3      IV,   3,  4. 

V,  4,  4;  23,  5.     VI,  36,  i  (2).     Total,   8. 


THE  SEQUENCE  OF  TENSES  IN  LATIN.  25 

2.  The   aoristic    pluperfect    following    a  descriptive  imperfect. 
Example:     I,  31,  8,   unum  se  esse  qui  adduci  non  potuerit;   he  was 
the  only  one  whom  they  had  not  been  able  to  induce. 

C.     I,  31,  8;   36,  7;  43,  7  (2);  44,  4.     VII,  20,  6,     Total,  6. 

3.  The  aoristic  pluperfect  following  an  imperfect  of  repeated 
action.      Example:     V,    33,    i,   turn  Titurius,  qui  nihil  ante  provi. 
disset,   trepidare;  then  Titurius,   who   had  made  no  preparations, 
kept  running  about. 

C.     V,  33,  i.     Total,  i. 

4.  The    aoristic  pluperfect  following  a  descriptive  pluperfect. 
Example:    III,  9,  3,  legates,  quod  nomen  inviolatum  semper  fuisset, 
in  vincla  coniectos;   they  had  thrown  into  chains  envoys,  a  name 
which  had  always  before  been  inviolate. 

A.  V,  11,9.  Total,  i.  B.  II,  26,  3.  VII,  40,  i;  77,  i.  Total,  3.  C.  Ill, 
9,  3.  V,  27,  2.  Total,  2. 

5.  The    aoristic    pluperfect    following    an    aoristic    pluperfect. 
Example:      I,    40,    8,     Ariovistum,    cum   multos  menses  castris   se 
tenuisset,  vicisse;  Ariovistus  had  conquered  them  after  he  had  kept 
to  his  camp  for  many  months. 

C.     I,  40,  8.'    Total,  i. 

6.  The   aoristic   pluperfect   of   an  act   lasting  up   to  the  future 
event  of  a  past  future.      Example:     VI,  7,  i,    Labienum  cum   una 
legione  quae   in   eorum  finibus  hiemaverat  adoriri  parabant;   they 
were  preparing  to  attack  Labienus  and  the  legion  which  had  been 
wintering  in  their  country. 

B.  VI,  7,  i.     Total,  i. 

7.  The  aoristic  pluperfect  of  an   act  or  state  lasting  up  to  the 
time  of  the  principal  verb  of  a  past  future.      Example:     VII,  33,  i, 
ne  civitas  quam  semper  aluisset  ad  vim  descenderet;  lest  a  state 
which  he  had  always  fostered  should  turn  to  violence. 

B.  VII,  59,  3;  64,  2.  Total,  2.  C.  I,  14,  3  (2);  14,  6;  40,  13.  VII,  14,  2; 
33,  i  (2).  Total,  7. 

Total  for  the  chapter,  A,  6;  B,  no;  C,  120. 

CHAPTER  V. 

THE  PAST  FUTURE  AND   FUTURE  PERFECT. 

While  it  is  easy  to  distinguish  in  general  the  future  and  past 
future  uses  of  the  subjunctive  from  the  other  uses,  a  little  examina- 
tion shows  that  at  least  two  or  three  varieties  of  future  must  be 
recognized  in  them;  and  it  is  not  perfectly  easy  to  make  this  sub- 
division. The  classification  here  given  is  not  entirely  satisfactory 


26  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

to  me  in  detail,  but  a  wider  study  of  tense  uses  than  can  be  made 
from  Caesar  or  than  I  have  yet  been  able  to  make  in  other  authors 
is  needed  to  settle  all  points;  and  the  one  given  is  sufficient  for  the 
purposes  of  this  paper. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  to  be  noted  that,  as  regards  the  original 
forces  of  the  subjunctive,  it  is  inaccurate  to  speak  of  the  present  as 
equivalent  to  the  future  indicative.  The  future  indicative  em- 
phasizes the  futurity  of  the  act,  simply  stating  that  it  will  occur  in 
the  future,  with  very  little  regard  to  the  present  aspect  of  the  case. 
The  present  periphrastic  on  the  other  hand  emphasizes  the 
presence  of  the  expectation  of  a  future  act.  The  present  subjunc- 
tive in  all  its  original  forces,  with  the  possible  exception  of  the 
anticipatory,  is  like  the  present  periphrastic  in  tense  force.  Its 
original  forces  are  all,  or  possibly  only  some  of  the  following*:  — 
let  him  go  (volitive),  he  is  likely  to  go  (anticipatory),  jiiay  he  go 
(optative),  he  may  go  (potential),  and  he  would  go  (ideal  cer- 
tainty). Probably  in  all  of  these  the  present  originally  expressed 
the  present  time  of  the  feelings  of  will,  expectation,  etc.,  though 
the  action  of  the  verb  lay  in  the  future.  The  anticipatory  sub- 
junctive may  at  its  very  origin  have  been  an  exception,  though  in 
the  great  uncertainty  which  surrounds  it  one  can  not  speak  with 
much  confidence.  If,  as  seems  probable,  it  is  a  pre-Latin  develop- 
ment from  the  volitive,  the  process  of  development  may  have  con- 
sisted just  in  this,  that  the  present  feeling  of  will  died  out  and  the 
emphasis  shifted  over  to  the  futurity  of  the  act.  In  that  case  the 
anticipatory  subjunctive,  as  such,  never  did  emphasize  the  present 
time  of  the  feeling  of  expectation.  However  this  may  be,  in  class- 
ical Latin  we  find  it  always  emphasizing  the  futurity  of  the  act, 
while  the  other  original  forces  retain  the  emphasis  on  the  present 
quality  of  the  feeling. 

When  any  of  these  present  subjunctives  are  thrown  back  into  the 
past  in  the  imperfect,  this  distinction  in  the  tenses  still  holds  in 
the  main,  and  we  have  some  constructions  in  which  the  imperfect 
signifies  that  a  feeling  of  will,  for  example,  lies  in  the  past,  the 
action  willed  being,  of  course,  future  to  that  time.  This  gives  us 
a  past  future  of  one  kind.  In  other  constructions  it  emphasizes 
mainly  the  futurity  of  some  act  to  a  past  point  of  reference.  This 
gives  us  a  past  future  of  another  kind. 

In  the  same  way  the  perfect  and  pluperfect  subjunctive  may  be 
regarded  as  future  perfect  and  future  perfect  to  a  past.  Other 

*This  is  the  classification  of  meanings  given  by  Professor  Hale  on  pp  6  and  7  of  The 
Anticipatory  Subjunctive  in  Greek  and  Latin  (University  of  Chicago  Studies  in  Class- 
ical Philology,  Vol.  I,  1895,  preprinted  in  1894. 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  2J 

writers  use  them  to  some  extent  in  the  former  kind  of  future  mean- 
ing, but  Caesar  does  so  almost  never.  When  he  does,  the  mean- 
ing of  the  verb  is  such  that  the  pluperfect  is  really  an  imperfect. 
Imperfects  and  pluperfects  representing  in  indirect  discourse  orig- 
inal futures  and  future  perfects  are  futures  of  the  second  kind. 

There  is  still  another  kind  of  past  future,  but  it  is  a  spurious  one. 
It  is  the  result  of  making  some  fixed  idiom,  as  indirect  question, 
substantive  result,  etc.,  dependent  on  a  past  future. 

In  this  chapter  the  division  according  to  time  meanings  has  re- 
sulted in  a  division  very  largely  according  to  syntactical  construc- 
tions. 

I.  Constructions  in  which  the  past  feeling  is  emphasized. 

1.  Final  clauses  of  all    kinds    (except  quin  and    quominus,   for 
which  see  IV)  and  dependent  deliberative  questions. 

As  there  are  no  indicative  constructions  to  be  compared  with  these, 
it  has  not  seemed  necessary  to  subdivide  them.  And  as  they  are 
so  easy  of  recognition  that  there  could  hardly  be  a  dispute  about 
the  individual  examples  I  give  only  the  total  number,  omitting  the 
references. 

Total,  498  imperfects  and  presents  equivalent  to  imperfects;  i  perfect  equivalent 
to  a  pluperfect. 

2.  The  subjunctive  in  indirect  discourse  representing  an  original 
imperative. 

!>  7.  5;  13-  4;  !3,  5  (2);  13,  7;  42,  4:  47-  i  (2)-  IV,  7,  4  (2);  n,  3;  n,  5;  16,  6. 
V,  34,  i;  34.  4;  41,  8  (2).  VII,  66,  4.  Total,  18. 

3.  The  potential  characterizing  clause.      These  clauses  are  com- 
monly explained   as  final;   but   see   Cum- Constructions,  pp.  106-107 
(120-121  of  German  edition).      Example:      I,  28,  3,  domi  nihil  erat 
quo  famem  tolerarent;  they  had  nothing  at  home  which  they  could 
eat. 

I,  28,  3.     Ill,  16,  3  (2).     IV,  38,  2.     VI,  39,  2.-    Total,  5, 

4.  The  subjunctive  of    ideal    certainty  in  result    clauses.      Ex- 
ample:   VII,  19,  3,  ut,  qui  propinquitatem  loci  videret,  existimaret; 
with  the  result  that  whoever  should  look  at  their  mere  proximity 
would  think. 

VII,  19,  3  (2).     Total,  2. 

II.  Constructions  in  which  the  idea  of  futurity   is  emphasized, 
i.      Clauses  with  duni  and    quoad,    "until",    and   priusquam  and 

potius  quam. 

These  clauses  must  be  treated  together,  since  the  principle  un- 
derlying their  use  of  mood  and  tense  is  the  same.  They  differ  from 


28  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

the  postquam  clauses  in  that  the  subordinate  acts  given  in  them  are 
subsequent  to  the  action  of  their  principal  clauses,  while  those  of 
the  postquam  clauses  are  precedent.  It  is  true  that  after  negative 
principal  clauses  the  relation  between  the  two  acts  is  really  re- 
versed; but  none  the  less  the  thought  of  the  writer  is  engaged  with 
the  condition  of  things  in  the  order  indicated  above. 

Since  these  clauses  represent  the  subordinate  act  as  subsequent 
to  the  principal  act,  it  is  obvious  that  the  actor  of  the  principal 
clause  may  be  thought  of  as  looking  forward  to  the  subordinate  act 
and  preparing  for  it,  preventing  it,  etc.,  or  not.  If  the  act  is  looked 
forward  to,  the  anticipatory  subjunctive  is  used;  if  not,  the  indica- 
tive (See  Hale's  Anticipatory  Subjunctive,  pp.  68-73,  84-92). 
This  distinction  usually  holds  good  for  the  past  tenses;  though 
there  was  an  encroachment  of  the  subjunctive,  appearing  mainly 
in  later  Latin.  But  in  the  future  the  future  tense  may  be  used, 
and  in  the  present  and  future  the  present  indicative  is  sometimes 
used,  as  it  regularly  is  in  English.  Accordingly,  some  of  the  in- 
direct discourse  examples  which  follow  may  represent  original 
presents  and  futures  indicative. 

a.  The  past  future  of  an  anticipated  act  before  which  the  action 
of  the  main  clause  occurred  or  was  expected  to  occur  (dum,  etc., 
not  possible*).      Example:     I,    19,    3.   priusquam  quicquam  cona- 
retur  Divitiacum  vocari  iubet;  before  taking  any  steps  he  ordered 
Divitiacus  to  be  summoned. 

1,  19,  3.      II,  12,  i.      Ill,  10,  3;   2.6,  3.      IV,  4,  7;    14,  i;   21,  i.      V,  27,   9;    56,   5. 
VI,  3,  2;  4,  i;  5,  5;  34,  7.     VII,  i,  6;  9,   5;   17,  7;  36,  7;  71,  i;  78,  i.     Total,   19. 

b.  The  past  future  perfect  in  the  same  use. 

II,  32,  i.     VII,  56,  i.     Total,  2. 

c.  The  past  future  of  an  anticipated  act  up  to  which   the  action 
of  the  principal  clause  lasted  or  was  expected  to  last  (both  dum, 
etc.,   and  priusqam    Bice  usedf).      Example:     I,   7,    5,   ut    spatium 
intercedere    posset    dum  milites  convenient;    that  sufficient  time 
might  intervene,  until  the  soldiers  should  arrive. 

T,  7,  5;   ii,  6.     IV,  13,  2;  23,  4.     Total,  4. 

d.  The  past  future  perfect  in  the  same  use. 

III,  18,  7.     IV,  11,6;   12,  2.     V,  24,  8;  58,  4.     VII,  36,  i.     Total,  6. 

2.  Subjunctives  in   indirect  discourse  representing  original  fu- 
tures and  future  perfects  indicative  in  conditions  and  relative  clauses. 

*  There  is  no  case  in  Caesar  of  the  perfectly  possible  aorist  indicative  of  a  not  antici- 
pated act  in  this  relation. 

*For  the  aorin  indicative  of  a  not  anticipated  act  in  this  relation  see  Chap.  X,  II,  2. 
For  the  apristic  pluperfect  subjunctive  in  indirect  discourse,  representing  such  an 
aorist  indicative,  see  Chap.  IX,  I.  *.  For  the  present  subjunctive  of  an  anticipated  act 
in  the  same  relation  see  Chap.  VIII,  IV, 3 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  2Q 

Some  of  these  probably  represent  subjunctives  of    the  less  vivid 
type  of  condition,  but  they  could  not  usually  be  distinguished. 

a.  The  imperfect    representing  an  original    future.      Example: 
I,  8,  2,   quo  facilius,  si  transire  conarentur,  prohibere  possit;  that 
he  might  stop  them  if  they  should  try  to  cross. 

I,  8,  2;  8,  3;  10,  2,  13,  3;  13,  4;  14,  6  (2);i8,  9;  31,  4;  35,  4  (2);  36,  i;  36,  5; 
36,  7;  40,  8;  40,  14;  42,  5;  44,  5  (2);  44,  8;  44,  n  (2);  44,  13.  II,  6,  4;  8,  5;  9,  i; 
9,  4;  17,  2;  31,  5.  Ill,  i,  3;  2,  4  (2);  5,  2;  n,  2.  IV,  7,  3;  8,  i;  n,  6;  13,  5; 
16,  i;  19,  i;  20,  2.  V,  3,  7;  5,  4;  7,  7  (2);  31,  2  (4);  46,  4;  48,  5;  50,  3  (2).  VI, 
33,  5;  34-  5:  34-  6.  VII,  6,  3  (2);  9,  4;  10,  i  (2);  19,  2;  19,  3  (2);  19,  5;  28,  i;  32, 
6;  33,  i:  36,  5:  56,  i;  66,  5  (3);  74,  i;  76,  5  (2);  78,  2  (2);  80,  i;  83,  5;  86,  2;  89, 
2;  90,  2.  In  VII,  10,  i,  videret  stands  for  a  future  indicative  in  a  causal  quod 
clause,  where  a  cum  clause  might  have  been  expected.  Total,  84. 

b.  Pluperfects  representing  original  future  perfects:     Example: 

I,  13,  3,   in  earn  partem  ituros  ubi  Caesar  constituisset;  they  would 
go  wherever  Caesar  should  have  decided  upon. 

I,  13,  3  (2);  17,  4;  20,  4;  22,  3;  26,  6;  30,  3;  30,  5;  31,  2  (2);  31,  15;  33,  4;  35, 
4;  36,  i  (2);  36,  5;  37,  4;  39,  7;  40,  4;  44,  12;  44,  13  (2);  50,  5.  II,  5,  3  (2);  8,  4; 
9,  5;  10,  4;  14,  5;  17,  2;  17,  4;  31,  3;  32,  i.  Ill,  24,  3.  IV,  6,  2;  ii,  3;  17,  10; 
20,  2  (3);  22,  i;  27,  i;  34,  5;  35.  i.  V,  i,  8;  6,  6;  29,  i  (2);  34,  i;  40,  i;  41,  8; 
47,  4;  56,  i;  58,  5.  VI,  i,  3;  6,  3;  32,  2;  40,  2.  VII,  5,  5;  17,  6;  20,  11;  21,  3; 
27,  2;  34,  i;  39,  4;  44,  4;  49,  2;  60,  i;  61,  5;  66,  7;  71,  3;  71,  6;  85,  3  (2).  Total, 
74- 

3.  The  anticipatory  subjunctive  in  indirect  questions  (See  Hale's 
Anticipatory  Subjunctive  in  Greek  and   Latin,  p,  34).      Example: 

II,  9,  i,   si  nostri  transirent  hostes  exspectabant;   the  enemy  kept 
waiting  to  see  if  we  would  cross. 

I,  8,  4.  II,  9,  i.  Ill,  24,  i.  VI,  29,  4;  37,  4;  39,  2.  VII,  20,  10;  32,  2;  36, 
3;  !»5,  9;  89,  5-  With  some  hesitation  I  include  here  VII,  14,  7  (2).  Total,  13. 

4.  The  volitive  subjunctive  in  other  dependent  relations,  equiva- 
lent in  tense  force  to  II,  2,  of  this  chapter. 

Ill,  9,  6.     VII,  64,  3  (2).     Total,  3. 
III.     The  spurious  past  future. 

1.  Indirect  questions.     Example:     I,   20,  6,   custodes  ponit  ut 
quae  agat  scire  possit;  he  set  guards  over  him  that  he  might  know 
what  he  did; 

I,  20,  6  (2);  47,  5.     V,  8,  i.     Total,  4. 

2.  Characterizing    clauses.      Example:     V,    36,    2,   sperare    im- 
petrari    posse    quod  ad  salutem  pertineat;    he  hoped  some  terms 
could  be  secured  which  would  secure  safety. 

V,  36,  2.     VII,  29,  6.     Total,  2. 

3.  Substantive  result  clauses.     Example:     I,  20,  4,   futurum  uti 
totius  Galliae  animi  a  se  averterentur;  the  result  would  be  that  all 
Gaul  would  turn  against  him. 


30  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

I,  4,  i;  10,  2;  20,  4;  31,  ii  (2);  31,  14  (3);  42,  3.  II,  17,  3.  IV,  35,  i.  VII, 
32,  6.  Total,  12. 

IV.      The  past  future  in  quin  and  quominus  clauses. 

I  regret  to  confess  that  I  neither  know  of  an  entirely  satisfactory 
treatment  or  classification  of  these  clauses  nor  can  make  one  for 
myself.  In  this  uncertainty  I  prefer  to  give  all  the  quin  and 
quominus  clauses  in  two  general  groups  rather  than  to  attempt  a 
further  subdivision.  I  believe  that  the  group  here  given  includes 
examples  of  all  three  of  the  preceding  larger  subdivisions  of  this 
chapter.  For  the  rest  of  these  clauses  see  Chap.  VI,  5. 

I,  31,  7;   31,  15;   33,  4  (2);  47,  2.     II,  2,  4  (2).     Ill,  18,  4  (2);   23,  7;  24,   5.      IV, 
7,  3;  22,  4.     V,  2,  2.     VII,  38,  8;  44,  4;  49,  2;  66,  6.     Total,  18. 
Total  for  the  chapter,  C,  765.  ^ 

CHAPTER  VI. 

SOME   DEVELOPED  SUBJUNCTIVE  CONSTRUCTIONS. 

In  this  chapter  are  given  those  subjunctive  constructions  which 
are  derived  from  the  future  uses  of  the  subjunctive,  but  in  which 
the  tense  meanings  are  not  equivalent  to  those  of  the  correspond- 
ing tenses  of  the  indicative. 

1.  The  breakdown  of  the  priusquam  clause  (See  Hale's  Antici- 
patory Subjunctive,  p.  87)*. 

In  later  Latin  than  Caesar's  it  is  not  unusual  for  a  subjunctive  to 
be  used  where  an  earlier  writer  would  have  used  the  indicative. 
This  is  an  extension  of  the  past  future  construction,  and  the  tenses 
are  retained.  Caesar  has  one  clear  case  of  this,  VII,  82,  4.  An- 
other in  which  it  may  be  possible  to  see  some  anticipatory  feeling 
is  VI,  37,  2.  Another  which  may  be  due  to  attraction  is  VI,  30,  2. 
Total,  3. 

2.  The  independent  question  of  propriety  in  indirect  discourse. 
Example:     I,  40,  2,   cur  quisquam  iudicaret?  Why  should  any  one 
suppose. 

I,  40,  2;  40,  4  (2).     IV,  16,  4.     VII,  37,  5.     Total,   5. 

3.  Result    clauses.     Professor    Hale's    explanation    of     these 
clauses  has  already  been  referred  to  in  Chap.  II.      I   accept  it  in 
general  though  the  exact  parallelism  between  the  clauses  of  result 
and  characterizing  clauses,  which  he  assumes,  can  not  be  regarded 
as  definitely  proved,  because  the  former  appears  fully  developed  in 
Plautus,  while  the  latter  does  not. 

The  result  clause  is  a  peculiar  idiom  standing  to  a  certain  extent 
alone  in  its  tense  meanings.      Our  nearest  approach  to  its  true  feel- 
*The  similar  breakdown  in  the  dum  clause  does  appear  in  Caesar. 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  3! 

ing  is  "such,  etc.,  as  to";  it  might  therefore  have  been  better  to 
give  all  the  examples  by  themselves.  But  in  most  cases  the  time 
meaning  is  found  to  be  parallel  with  one  or  another  of  the  subordi- 
nate indicative  tense  meanings,  and  those  examples-  have  been 
given  already,  appearing  under  most  of  the  subdivisions  of  the  pre- 
ceding chapters.  There  remain  to  be  given  here  those  cases  in 
which  the  imperfect  has  an  aoristic  force.  If  it  depends  upon  an 
aorist  or  imperfect  as  in  most  of  the  following  examples,  it  is 
equivalent  in  meaning  to  an  aorist;  if  upon  a  pluperfect,  it  is  some- 
times equivalent  to  an  aoristic  pluperfect.  Example:  I,  39,  i, 
tantus  timor  exercitum  occupavit  ut  mentes  perturbaret;  such  fear 
siezed  upon  the  army  that  it  dismayed  all. 

I,  20,  5;  25,  4;  31,  4;  39,  i;  ^2,  3;  52,  5  (3).  II,  n,  i;  19,  7;  27,  i;  35,  i.  Ill, 
4,  i;  19,  3  (2);  22,  3.  IV,  12,  2;  28,  2  (3).  V,  17,  2;  18,  5  (2);  23,  3-4  (3);  33,  6 
(2);  39,  2;  40,  7;  43,  4  (3);  43,  5(2);  44,  1-3  (2);  51,  3;  51,  4;  53,  i;  53,  7.  VI, 
12,  4  (5);  17,  5;  30,  2  (2);  37,  2;  38,  5  (2);  41,  2;  41,  3  (2);  43,  4  (2);  43,  5  (4). 
VII,  17,  5  (2);  24,  5  (4);  28,  6;  29,  4;  46,  5;  76,  i  (2).  In  I,  13,  2,  the  transirent 
clause  is  simply  a  timeless  substantive.  In  the  two  following  the  perfect  stands  in 
indirect  discourse  for  an  original  true  perfect,  not  aorist.  I,  n,  3.  II,  3,  5. 
Total,  75. 

4.  Conditions  contrary  to  fact. 

a.  The  imperfect  in  present  conditions  contrary  to  fact. 
I,  34,  2.     V,  29,  2.     VII,  77,  6;  77,  13.     Total,  4. 

b.  The  imperfect  in  conditions  contrary  to  fact  where  a  plu- 
perfect would  be  expected. 

VII,  46,  i.     Total,  i. 

c.  The  pluperfect  in  past  conditions  contrary  to  fact. 
I,  14,  2.     VII,  88,  6.     Total,  2. 

5.  Quin  and  quominus  clauses  (See  Chap.  V,  IV)*. 

I,  3,  6;  17,  4.     V,  53,  5;  55,  i  (4).     VI,  39,  3.     VII,  n,  8;  36,  4.     Total,   10. 
Total  for  the  chapter,   C,    100. 

CHAPTER  VII. 

TENSES  OF  REPEATED  ACTION  DEPENDING  ON  SIMILAR  TENSES. 

In  the  examples  here  included  a  clause  containing  a  tense  of 
repeated  action  depends  on  another  in  such  a  way  that  each  act  of 
the  subordinate  verb  is  a  condition,  result,  purpose,  &c.,  of  an  act 
of  the  principal  verb.  They  are  thus  quite  different  from  the 
tenses  of  repeated  action  given  in  other  chapters,  where  a  series 
of  acts  is  related  to  a  single  act,  or  is  as  a  whole  related  to  another 
series  without  each  act's  being  related  to  a  single  one  of  the  other 
*The  only  other  quin  clause  in  Caesar  will  be  found  under  Chap.  VII. 


32  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

series.  Except  in  conditional  clauses  this  relation  is  of  little  im- 
portance, and  is  hard  to  distinguish  from  the  single  act.  Some 
that  might  have  been  put  here  have  been  left  under  the  corres- 
ponding categories  of  single  acts.  The  conditional  sentences 
showing  this  relation  are  probably  all  here. 

1.  The  imperfect   of  repeated   action  depending  on  the    imper- 
fect of  repeated  action.      Example:   VII,  17,  4,  Caesar  cum  singulas 
legiones  appellaret,    petebant,  &c. ;  when  Caesar   addressed  the  le- 
gions one  by  one,  they  would  beg  him,  &c. 

A.  VII,  67,  4   (2).     Total  2.     B.     I,  39,  6;  48,  6;  48,  7.     II,  i,  4;  20,  4.     Ill, 
4,  2.     V,  40,  6;  45,  i.     VI,  12,  7;   19,  5.     VII,  4,  3;  67,  4.     Total   12.     C.     I,  14, 
5;   17,  5;  32,  4;  50,  4.     II,  20,  i;  27,  4.     Ill,    13,    5  (2);   14.   7      IV,    7,    3;   17,    7. 
V,  33,  6;   35-4-     VI,  15,  i  (2).     VII,  14,  6;   16,  2   (2);    16,   3  (2);   17,   4   (2);  73,    6. 
Total  23. 

2.  The  imperfect  of  repeated   action    following  a  pluperfect   of 
repeated    action.      Example:     IV,    17,    4;    haec    cum    defixerat    ut 
secundum    naturam   fluminis   procumberent;  when  he  had  set  each 
pair  in  such  a  way  that  it  sloped  down-stream. 

B.  IV,  17,  6.     VI,  34,  2.     Total  2.     C.     IV,  17,  4.     Total  i. 

3.  The  pluperfect  of  repeated  action  following  an  imperfect  of 
repeated   action.      Example:      I,  25,  3;  cum    ferrum    se  inflexisset, 
non  evellere  poterant;  when  the  point  had  bent  they  could  not  pull 
it  out. 

B.     I,  48,  6.     II,   ii,   4.     Ill,  4,  4;   12,  2;   14,  6  (2);  15,  i;  29,  i      IV,  17,  4  (2); 

26,  i;  26,    2;  26,  4.     V,    19,    i;   19,    2;  34,    2;   35,    i   (2);     35,    3  (3).     VI,    43,    2. 

VII,  22,  2;  22,  4;  28,  6;  48,  2;  73,  4;  81,  6;  84,  2.  Total  29.  C.  I,  25,  3;  31, 
12.  II,  14,  5;  27,  3.  Ill,  12,  i;  13,  7  (2).  V,  16,  2.  Total  8. 

4  The  pluperfect  of  repeated  action  following  a  pluperfect  of 
repeated  action.  Example:  V,  35,  3;  cum  in  eum  locum  unde 
erant  egressi  reverti  coeperant;  whenever  they  had  begun  to  retreat 
to  the  place  from  which  they  had  started. 

B.  II,  7,  3.     V,  35,  3.     Total  2. 

5.  The   repeated    past  future   following  a  repeated    imperfect. 
Example:     IV,  16,  i;  cum  videret  Germanos  tarn  facile   impelli   ut 
in  Galliam  venirent;  since  he  saw  that  the  Germans  were  so  easily 
induced  to  enter  Gaul. 

C.  IV,  16,  i.     Total  i. 

6.  The  past  future  perfect   of   repeated    action   following  a  past 
future  of  repeated  action.      Example:     V,  34,  3;  Pronuntiari  iubet 
quam  in  partem  Romani  impetum   fecerint   cedant;  he  commanded 
that  in  whatever  direction  the  Romans  should  advance, they  should 
retire. 

C.     V,  34,  3.     Total  i. 

Total  for  the  chapter,   A,  2;  B,  45;  C,  34. 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  33 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

PRESENTS,  PERFECTS,  AND  FUTURES. 

These  tenses  correspond  for  the  present  time-sphere  to  the 
imperfect  and  pluperfect  in  the  past  time-sphere.  Accordingly  it 
has  not  seemed  necessary  to  give  a  special  heading  and  example 
for  each  category.  A  reference  is  made  in  each  case  to  the  cor- 
responding category  for  the  past  time-sphere,  where  the  headings 
and  examples  will  serve  mutatis  mutandis  for  the  divisions  of  this 
chapter. 

Though  there  is  theoretically  an  aoristic  present  bearing  the 
same  relation  to  the  descriptive  present  as  the  aorist  bears  to  the 
imperfect,  it  is  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  classify  the  examples 
satisfactorily  on  this  basis,  and  all  presents  have  been  called  de- 
scriptive. The  true  perfect  corresponds  exactly  to  the  descriptive 
pluperfect,  aorist  to  the  aoristic  pluperfect,  the  present  subjunctive 
in  the  future  sense  to  the  past  future,  &c. 

I.  The  descriptive  present  and  present  of  repeated  action. 

1.  Cf.  Chap.  II,  I,  3.     A.     VI,  35,  9  (2).     Total  2.     B.     VI,    35.  8.     VII,  77, 
16.     Total  2.     C.     V,  54,  5.     VI,  n,   i.     VII,  38,  7  (2).     Total  4. 

2.  Cf.  Chap.  II,  I,  6.     C.     IV,  5,  3  (2).     Total  2. 

3.  Cf.  Chap.  II,  I,  7.     C.     VI,  25,  4.     Total  i. 

4.  Cf.  Chap.  II,  I,  14.     A.     VI,  8,  3  (2).     VII,  38,  3.     Total  3.     B.     VII,  38, 
8;  50,  6;  77,  3;  77,  4:77,  n;  77,  16  (2).     Total  7. 

5.  Like  4,  but  with  present  of  repeated  action:     B.     VI,  22,  3.     Total  i. 

6.  Cf.  Chap.  II,  i,  17.     A.     VII,   50,  6.     Total  i.     B.     IV,  25,    3.     V,  30,  i. 
VII,  50,  4.     Total  3. 

7.  Cf.  Chap.  II,  II,  3.  B.   I,  i,  i;  i,  3  (3);   i,  7;  2,  3  (3);  4,  4;  10,  i;  12,  i;  16, 
5;  38,  5  (2).     Ill,   8,    i    (3);  21,   3.     IV,    2,    6;  3,    3;   10,  i;  10,  3;   10,  5  (2);  20,  i. 

V,  ii,  8;  12,    i;  13,    i;  13,  2   (2);  13,  3;  13,  5;  14,  i   (2).     VI,  n,  3;  13,  i;  18,  3; 
20,  i;  20,  2  (2);  24,  4-6  (3);  26,  i;  27,    i;  28,  i.     VII,  20,  12  (2);  23,  5;  50,  6;  75, 
4.     Total  51.     C.     I,  12,  i  (2);  38,  5.     IV,  i,  9;  2,  i;  14,  3.     VI,  25,  4;  25,  5  (2); 
35,  9  (2).     Total,  n. 

8.  Cf.  Chap.  II,  II,  4.     B.     I,  i,  3.     IV,   2,  2.     V,   14,   2.     VI,   13,   10;  16,   3. 
VII,  23,  5.     Total,  6. 

9.  Cf.  Chap.  II,  II,  5.     A.     II,  6,  2  (2).     VII,  23,  1-5  (8).     Total,  10.     B.     I, 
i,  3  (2);  i,  4;   16,  5.     IV.  3,  3.     V,  13,  i.     VI,  18,  3;  21,  5  (2);  30,  5.     VII,  23,  5. 
Total,  ii.     C.     Ill,  22,  2  (3).     IV,  5,  2  (4).     VI,  u,  3.     Total,  8. 

10.  Cf.  Chap.  II,  II,  6.     B.     IV,  2,  2  (2).     Total,   2. 

n.     Cf.  Chap.  II,  II,  8.     B.     Ill,  8,   i.     IV,   10,   i.     V,   12,   2.     Total,   3.     C. 

VI,  14,  4.     Total,   i. 

12.  The  descriptive  present  extending  from  the  time  of  a  principal  verb  to  that  of 
the  future  event  of  a  future.  B.  VI,  14,  4.  VII,  5,  6.  Total,  2. 

II.  The  descriptive  perfect. 

i.  Cf.  Chap.  Ill,  I,  2.  A.  VI,  35,  9.  VII,  38,  2  (2).  Total,  3.  B.  VII, 
38,  3.  Total,  i. 


34  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

2.  Cf.  Chap.  Ill,  I,  8.     B.     VII,  38,  8  (2);  77,  7;  77,  9.     Total,  4. 

3.  Cf.  Chap.  Ill,  II,  2.     B.     Ill,  8,  i  (2).     IV,  3,  3.     V,  12;  2  (4).     VI,    n,  i; 
26,  i.     VII,  57,  i;  77,  10.     Here  probably  belongs  also  IV,  10,  4.     Total,    12.     C. 

VI,  25,  4;  25,  5.     Total,   2. 

4.  Like  3,  but  following  a  present  of  repeated  action.     C.     IV,  33,  3.     Total,  i. 

5.  The  situation  of  a  perfect  lasting  up  to  the  future  event  of  a  future.     B. 

VII,  50,  4;  77,  15      Total,  2. 

III.  The  aorist  following  a  tense  of  the  present  time-sphere. 

1.  Cf.  Chap.  IV,  I.     B.     IV,  3,  3.     VII,  77,  12.     Total,   2.     C.     I,   4,  4.     VI, 
31,  i.     VII,  5,  6.     Total,  3. 

2.  '  Cf.  Chap.  IV,  III.     B.     VI,  8,  3;  8,  4;  20,  2.     Total,  3. 

IV.  Futures  of  all  kinds. 

1.  Cf.  Chap.  V,  I,  i.     IV,  2,  i  (2);  33,  2.     VI,  13,  7;  20,  i  (3);  22,  3  (6);  23,   4 
(2);  28,  3.     VII,  20,  8;  20,  12;  77,  5  (2).     Total,  20. 

2.  Cf.  Chap.  V,  I,  2.     VI,  23,  7.     Total,  i. 

3.  Cf.  Chap.  V,  II,  i,  c.     VII,  23,  4.     Total,  i. 

4.  Cf.  Chap,  V,  II,  2,  a.    IV,  33,  2.     V,  30,  3.     VI,  22,  4.     VII,  77,  8.     Total,  4. 

5.  Cf.   Chap.   V,   II,   2,  b.     B     (The    indicative    may    appear    here,   though  it 
could  not  in  the  past).    V,  30,  2.    Total,  i.    C.     IV,  2,  i.     VI,  17,  3;  20,  i.    Total,  3. 

V.  Corresponding  to  Chap.  VII. 

1.  Cf.  Chap.  VII,  i.     B.     Ill,  18,  6.     IV,    2,  3;  5,  3.     V,  33,  i.    VI,  13,2;  13, 
5;   13,  9  (2);  13,  10,   13,  n;  15,  i;  15,  2;   16,  2;   19,  4;  23,  4  (2);  23,  6;  23,  7.     VII, 
21,  i;  84,  5.     Total,  20.     C.     Ill,  22,  2.     IV,  2,  2.     VI,  14,  4;  16,   3;  18,   2;  27, 
4.     VII,  23,  3  (3)-     Total,  9. 

2.  Cf.  Chap.  VII,  2.     C      VI,  18,  3.     Total,  i. 

3.  The  present  of  repeated  action  following  a  future  of  repeated  action.     C. 
IV,  5,  2.     VI,  23,  7,     Total,  2. 

4.  Cf.  Chap.  VII,  3.'     B.     II,  6,  2  (2).     IV,  i,  5;  2,  2;  33,  i.     V,  14,  5  (2);  21, 
3.     VI,  13,  5  (2);  13,  6;  13,  7;   16,  2;   16,  5;   17,  3  (2);   18,  3;   19,  i;  19,  2;  19,  3  (2); 
20,  3  (2);  21,  4;  22,   2  (2);  23,   7;  23,   8;  23,  9;  27,   2;  27,  4;  27,   5;  28,   2;  28,   3. 
I  include  the  following  though  the  form  may  be  present.     V,  56,  2.     VI,  15,  i;   19, 
3.     VII,  3,  2.     Total,  38.     C.     Ill,  22,  2.     IV,  5,  2  (2).     VI,  16,  5.     Total,  4. 

5.  Cf.  Chap.  VII,  4.     B.     V,  21,  3.     Total,  i.     C.     VI,  27.  4.     Total,  i. 

6.  The  perfect  of  repeated  action  following  a  future  of  repeated  action.     C. 
IV,  5,  2.     Total,  i. 

7.  I  am  in  dcubt  as  to  whether  VII,  n,  4,  faciat  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  "mixed1 
condition,  in  which  case  it  is  a  sort  of  future;  or  as  the  so-called  subjunctive  of 
repeated  action,  in  which  case  it  belongs  under  i.     I  incline  toward  ths  latter  view, 
although  this  subjunctive  is  rare  in  Caesar,  and  rare  in  the  present  at  all  periods. 
Total,  i. 

VI.  Miscellaneous. 

1.  A  present  following  a  present  in  a  "balancing  clause"  (See  Chap.  X,  II,  7).     B. 
Ill,  19,  7.     Total,  i. 

2.  A  present  following  a  present  in  the  relation  of  "coincidence"  (See  Chap.  X, 
II,  4).     B.     I,  i,  4  (2).     II,  17,  4.     Total,  3- 

3.  A  construction  which  I  find  difficulty  in  properly  classifying,  but  which  I 
prefer  to  call  a  "potential  determination"  is,  C,  V,  30,  2.     Total,  i. 

Totals  for  the  chapter,   A,  19;  B,  176;  C,  82. 


THE  SEQUENCE  OF  TENSES  IN  LATIN.  35 

CHAPTER  IX. 

THE   REMAINING  TENSES   IN   SEQUENCE. 

In  this  chapter  are  given  all  the  indicative  and  subjunctive  tenses 
in  sequence  which  have  not  been  given  under  the  previous  chapters. 
It  includes  therefore  a  very  miscellaneous  assortment  of  examples. 
I  give  at  the  end  a  summing  up  of  the  results  so  far  reached. 

I.  Tenses  whose  lack  of  logical  sequence  is  disguised  by  indirect 
discourse. 

So  far  as  Caesar  is  concerned,  I  feel  safe  in  saying  that  the  flat- 
tening out  of  logical  distinctions  in  indirect  questions  and  indirect 
discourse  consists  in  a  mere  disguise  of  the  lack  of  sequence  in  the 
original  language,  the  resulting  tense  being  always  used  strictly  in 
accordance  with  its  proper  meaning.  It  is  true  that  repraesentatio 
occasionally  retains  the  exceptional  tense,  and  examples  of  this  will 
be  noted  in  the  following  chapter;  but  repraesentatio  is  so  common 
that  it  takes  a  very  close  examination  to  show  when  the  tense  is  the 
representative  of  a  non-sequent  tense,  and  it  seems  fair  to  speak  of 
even  those  cases  as  disguised.  Beyond  a  doubt,  more  than  this 
disguising  takes  place  in  other  authors  in  these  constructions.  A 
perfect  after  a  present  may,  though  seldom,  represent  an  imperfect 
in  an  indirect  question,  and  there  is  then  a  true  flattening  out  of 
tense  distinctions.  But  I  find  no  instance  of  this  or  any  similar 
phenomenon  in  the  Gallic  War. 

The  disguising  of  tense  distinctions  by  indirect  discourse  is,  how- 
ever, common  enough,  and  results  from  two  causes.  First,  the 
tenses  of  the  subjunctive,  being  fewer  in  number  than  those  of  the 
indicative  which  they  have  to  represent,  have  more  work  to  per- 
form than  in  the  direct  form,  and  the  distinctions  of  tense  are  not 
so  readily  seen.  But  since  the  resulting  tenses  are  nevertheless 
used  in  strict  accordance  with  their  proper  meanings,  the  examples 
do  not  fall  under  this  head  but  under  one  or  another  of  the  preced- 
ing chapters. 

Second,  in  direct  discourse  the  tenses  for  the  most  part  belong 
to  the  ordinary  past,  present,  and  future  time-spheres,  for  which 
there  is  a  fair,  though  not  complete,  complement  of  tenses.  By  in- 
direct discourse  they  are  thrown  back  a  step,  so  that  we  have  an 
ante-past  time-sphere,  if  I  may  so  speak,  a  past  time-sphere,  and  a 
past  future  time-sphere.  This  ante-past  time-sphere  has  already 
been  spoken  of  in  Chap.  II,  and  it  has  been  shown  that  the  sub- 
junctives not  in  indirect  discourse  occasionally  suffer  in  clearness 
from  the  lack  of  tenses  to  represent  it.  It  works  more  trouble  in 


36  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

indirect  discourse,  because  every  past  of  tbe  direct  form  is  thrown 
back  into  it,  and  this  happens  very  frequently.  It  is  true  that  as 
most  tenses  in  the  direct  form  are  in  sequence,  so  they  are  still 
logically  as  well  as  formally  in  sequence  in  the  indirect.  But 
wherever  the  direct  form  had  a  present  depending  on  a  past,  the 
indirect  imperfect  is  logically  out  of  sequence  with  the  perfect  in- 
finitive or  pluperfect  on  which  it  depends,  though  formally  in 
sequence.  And  wherever  the  direct  form  had  an  aorist  depending 
on  a  past,  the  indirect  pluperfect  is  logically  out  of  sequence 
with  the  past  infinitive  or  pluperfect  on  which  it  depends,  though 
formally  in  sequence. 

No  sure  instance  of  the  disguised  present  following  a  past  has 
been  found.  In  the  direct  form  this  relation  occurs  almost  entire- 
ly where  the  present  states  a  general  truth  or  describes  something 
still  existing.  But  an  imperfect  is  used  with  equal  frequency  in 
these  cases  in  direct  discourse.  Therefore  it  is  impossible  to  say 
of  any  given  indirect  imperfect  whether  it  represent?  an  original 
present  or  an  imperfect,  though  repracsentatio  might  help  one  to  a 
few  examples.  All  the  examples  under  this  heading  are  of  aorists. 

1.  The  pluperfect  or  perfect  subjunctive  for  an  aorist  indicative 
viiih  postquam  (See  Chap.  X,  II,  i). 

I,  31,  5.  IV,  19,  2.  VI,  10,  4.  With  ut  meaing  "ever  since,"  I,  31,^5. 
Total,  4. 

2.  The    pluperfect    subjunctive    for    an    aorist    indicative    with 
prinsquam  (See  Chap.  X,  II,  2). 

I,  43,  7.     Total,   i. 

3.  The   perfect  subjunctive   for  an   aorist   indicative  with   quam 
diu  in  "congruence"  (See  Chap.  X,  II,  6), 

I,  17,  6.     Total,  i. 

4.  The  pluperfect  or  perfect  subjunctive  for  the  aorist  indicative 
in  "coincidence  (See  Chap.  X,  II,  4). 

I, .18,  10;  30,  2;  31,  12;  35,  2.     V,  27,  3;  27,  4.     VII,  20,3  (2);  52,  3-     Total,  9. 

5.  The  pluperfect  or  perfect  subjunctive  for  the  aorist  indica- 
tive following  an  aorist  (See  Chap.  X,  III,  4). 

I,  36,  3  (3):  4°.  I2I  44,  9-  II,  4,  7.  Ill,  28,  2.  VI,  42,  2.  VII,  29,  2;  41,  i. 
Total,  10. 

6.  The  perfect  subjunctive   by  repraesentatio   for  an   aorist  sub- 
junctive in  result  (See  Chap.  X,  I,  i). 

VII,  37,  4.     Total,  i. 

7.  The  perfect  subjunctive   by  repraesentatio  for  an  aorist  sub- 
junctive in  concessive  clause  (See  Chap.  X,  I,  2). 

VI,  25,  4.     Total,  i. 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  37 

8.      The  perfect  subjunctive  by  repraesentatio  for  an  aorist  indica- 
tive in  conclusions. 
VII,  33,  3.     Total,  i. 

II.  Idioms  in  which  the  subordinate  clause  is  regularly  of  the 
same  tense  as  the  principal  clause. 

In  these  idioms,  when  the  principal  verb  is  an  aorist  the  subor- 
dinate verb  is  out  of  sequence  and  will  be  given  in  Chap.  X,  II; 
but  when  it  is  any  other  tense,  the  subordinate  clause  is  in  se- 
quence. 

1.  "Coincidence"  (See  Chap.  X,  II,  4). 

a.  The  imperfect  or  present  subjunctive  in  indirect  discourse  for 
a  present  indicative. 

I,  36,  6;  40,  12;  44,  6;  44,  9;  44,  10.     V,  27,  n  (2).     Total,  7. 

b.  The   perfect  subjunctive   in   indirect  discourse   for  an  aorist 
indicative. 

I,  17,  6.     Total,  i. 

c.  The   imperfect   subjunctive  where  the   relation   seems   to  be 
that  of  coincidence,  but  the  mood  of  the  cum  clause  seems  to  disre- 
gard it  (the  indicative  being  regular  in  such  clauses). 

II,  29,  5  (2).     V.  54,  i.     Total,  3. 

2.  "Pseudo-coincidence"  (See  Chap.  X,  II,  5). 

a.  The  imperfect  indicative  following  an  imperfect. 
V,  19,  3;  57.  4-     VI,  34-  7-     VII,  16,  3.     Total,  4. 

b.  The  past  future  subjunctive  following  a  past  future. 

I,  35;  4.  Ill,  ii,  5.  IV,  21,  8.  V,  i,  i;  7,  i;  n,  4.  VII,  8,  3;  35,  5. 
Total,  8. 

3.  The   imperfect   indicative   in    "congruence"   (See   Chap.    X, 
II,  6). 

VII,  81,  2.     Total,  i. 

4.  The  past  future  subjunctive  following  a  descriptive  imper- 
fect in  a  "balancing  clause"  (See  Chap.  X,  II,  7). 

I,  44,  8.     Total,  i. 

III.  Clauses  which  are  properly  out  of  sequence,  but  by  hap- 
pening to  depend  on  presents  are  formally  in  sequence. 

Caesar's  frequent  "///  dictum  est,"  etc.,  is  probably  a  perfect;  but 
whether  perfect  or  aorist  it  is  out  of  sequence  with  a  past  verb. 
Sometimes,  however,  it  depends  on  a  present  and  then  is,  so  far 
as  form  goes,  in  sequence  (See  Chap.  X,  III  i). 

I,  i,  5.     Ill,  20,  i,     V,  3,  i      VI,  25,  i;  29,  i.     VII,  23,  2;  58,   3.     Total,  7. 

IV.  True  sequence  feeling  triumphing  over  an  idiom. 


3  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

As  Caesar  has  no  idioms  in  the  subjunctive  which  regularly  vio- 
late sequence,  none  but  indicatives  are  found  here;  and  they  are 
all  in  the  postquam,  etc.,  aorist  idiom  (See  Chap.  X,  II,  i).  Few 
good  cases  occur  even  here.  In  VII,  87,  3,  the  imperfect  appears 
with  postquam,  the  meaning  calling  for  that  tense.  The  few  im- 
perfects and  pluperfects  with  ubi  are,  I  believe,  all  generalizing  and 
have  been  classified  in  the  appropriate  subdivisions  of  Chap.  VII. 

A  relative  clause  is  used  four  times  with  a  meaning  exactly 
equivalent  to  this  idiom;  but  as  the  form  is  not  the  same  the  tense 
yields  to  the  idiom  only  twice  (See  Chapter  X,  II,  i,  d. ),  and  the 
other  two  examples  use  the  natural  tenses. 

Ill,  23,  2.%    IV,  18,  i.     Total,  3. 

V  Formal  sequence  observed  where  the  sense  might  lead  one 
to  expect  an  exception. 

1.  It  may  be  mentioned  here  that  in  a  number  of  cases,  which 
have    been  classified    elsewhere,   the  imperfect  of  such  a  verb  as 
dicere  has  been  used  where  the  tense  would  strictly  be  appropriate 
only  if  such  a  verb  as  existimare  had  been   used,   and    the  aorist 
might  have  been  more  accurate  since  dicere  was  chosen.     Examples: 
(Indicative)    VII,     75,     5,     numerum     non     compleverunt     quod 
dicebant,  etc.;  they  did  not  fill  up  their  quota  because  they  said, 
etc.,    (because,    as    they    said,   etc.,   or,    because    they    felt,   etc.). 
(Subjunctive)   V,  6,  3,    Partim  quod  timeret,  partim  quod  diceret. 

2.  Instead  of  the  "ut  dictum  esf\  etc.,  (See  Chapter  X,  III,  i) 
which    seems    to    give    the    appropriate    tense    meaning,    Caesar 
occasionally  uses  a  pluperfect.      On  this  use  of  the  tense  see  Blase, 
Geschichte  des  Plusquamperfekts,  pp.  13  ff. 

II,  i,  i;  24,  i;  28,  i.     IV,  57,  2.     Total,  4. 

3.  A  few  doubtful  cases  may  be  mentioned  for  the  subjunctive. 
I,  50,  4,  cum  quaereret  quam  ob  rem  Ariovistus  proelio  non  decertaret;  when 

he  asked  why  Ariovistus  did  not  fight.  But  this  is  equivalent  to  such  "persistent" 
imperfects  indicative  as  I,  15,  4,  Caesar  suos  a  proelio  continebat;  Caesar  kept  re- 
straining his  men.  II,  27,  5,  non  ut  deberet;  so  it  ought  not  to  be  thought.  A 
present  would  have  been  appropriate  enough  here,  but  the  writer's  thought  is  busy 
with  the  past  time.  V,  -o,  2,  qui  nuntiarent  naves  in  litore  eiectas  esse  quod 
neque  ancorae  subsisterent;  to  report  that  the  ships  had  been  driven  upon  the 
shore  because  the  anchors  did  not  hold.  But  here  the  pluperfect  would  seem  more 
appropriate  than  the  possible  aorist.  Probably  it  represents  a  kind  of  imper- 
fect of  repeated  action,  "because  the  anchors  kept  giving."  V,  u,  8,  eo  cum 
venisset  maiores  copiae  convenerant;  when  he  arrived  greater  forces  had  assem- 
bled. One  might  possibly  expect  a  cum  venif  as  in  VI,  12,  i,  (See  Chap.  X.  II,  9.) 
but  the  common  narrative  clause  is  used  instead.  Total,  4. 

VI.  Tenses  in  sequence  used  peculiarly  for  others  which  would 
also  have  been  in  sequence. 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  39 

1.  The  imperfect  where  a  pluperfect  would  have  seemed  more 
natural. 

B.  The  first  three  indicatives  put  here  are  all  due  to  an  expression  of  time  in 
in  the  clause,  as  in  the  independent  imperfect  for  aorist  in  VII,  24,  3,  eodem  tern- 
pore  eruptio  fiebat;  at  the  same  time  a  sally  was  made  (was  going  on).  VII,  44,  i; 
48,  3:  59.  2;  69,  6.  Total,  4.  C.  In  the  two  following  subjunctives  I  see  no  good 
reason  for  the  imperfect.  II,  23,  3.  VII,  33,  3.  In  I,  50,  4;  II,  4,  i;  15,  3,  cum 
quaereret  reperiebat,  we  have  the  common  imperfect  in  verbs  of  asking.  In  I,  41, 
5,  septimo  die,  cum  iter  non  intermitterent,  certiora  factus  est,  we  might  expect  a 
pluperfect;  but  the  feeling  may  be  "he  marched  for  seven  days,  not  interrupting 
his  advance."  Total  6. 

2.  The  pluperfect  where  an  imperfect  would  have  seemed  more 
natural. 

II,  6,  4,  Iccius,  qui  turn  praefuerat,  mittit;  Iccius,  who  was  in  command,  sent. 
But  the  turn  seems  to  point  to  the  time  of  the  preceding  assault.  Total,  i. 

3.  The  imperfect  where  an   imperfect   periphrastic  would  have 
seemed  more  natural. 

VII,  26,  2,  Id  sese  effecturos  sperabant,  quod  palus  Romanos  tardabat;  was  sure 
to  hinder  the  Romans.  Total,  i. 

VII.      Miscellaneous. 

i.  Subjunctive  questions  in  indirect  discourse  (not  questions  of 
propriety). 

1.  44,  8  (2);  47,  6.     II,  30,  4.     V,  29,  5.     Total,  5. 

2.  Aoristic  pluperfect  indicative  depending  syntactically  on   a 
pluperfect,  but  temporally  on  the  principal  verb. 

II,  33,  2.     Ill,  3,  i;   16,  2.     IV,  6,  2.     V,  8,  6;  20,  i.     Total,  6. 

3.  I  cannot  satisfy  myself  as  to  either  mood  or  tense  force  of  VII, 
72,   4,   Turres  circumdedit   quae  distarent.      The  subjunctive  may 
possibly  be  characterizing,  or  perhaps  merely  parallel  with  the  pre- 
ceding tardarent,  almost  attraction.      Total,  i. 

Total  for  the  chapter,  B,  31;  C,  64. 

SUMMARY  OF    RESULTS   SO    FAR   OBTAINED. 

We  have  now  finished  with  all  tenses  which  are  in  sequence, 
except  those  in  coordinate  relative  clauses.  We  have  found  940 
dependent  indicatives  and  1861  subjunctives  in  sequence.  There 
remain  for  consideration  in  the  following  chapter  only  the  excep- 
tions in  both  moods.  Of  these  there  will  be  found  282  dependent 
indicatives  and  13  subjunctives.  Many  of  these  will  be  found  to 
appear  in  certain  well  defined  idioms;  so  that  we  may  say  at  once 
that  most  of  the  tenses  in  both  moods  are  in  sequence,  though  the 
proportion  of  exceptions  is  very  much  greater  in  the  indicative  than 
in  the  subjunctive.  There  have  been  given  also  371  independent 


4°  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

indicatives  which  can  fairly  be  said  to  be  in  sequence.  As  I  have 
made  no  count  of  the  great  number  of  independent  indicatives 
which  are  out  of  sequence  the  exact  number  of  those  in  sequence  is 
of  little  consequence.  I  regard  the  examples  themselves,  however, 
as  very  important,  by  way  of  showing  how  the  same  feeling  oper- 
ates in  independent  sentences  as  in  dependent  clauses. 

I  hope  I  may  be  believed  to  have  shown  that  all  the  examples  of 
the  subjunctive  so  far  given  are  in  sequence  not  because  of  any 
more  mechanical  flattening  out  of  logical  distinctions  than  is  to  be 
found  in  the  indicative,  but  that  almost  all  the  tenses  are  used  in 
strict  conformity  with  the  tense  meanings  as  laid  down  in  Chap.  I, 
and  that  in  the  very  small  minority  the  subjunctive  shows  no  more 
divergence  than  does  the  indicative.  I  therefore  regard  Professor 
Hale's  main  contention  as  fully  proved.  The  few  exceptions  to  be 
noted  in  the  following  chapter  will  only  confirm  the  theory  that  the 
tenses  of  the  subjunctive  are  fully  expressive  of  time. 

CHAPTER  X. 

EXCEPTIONS   TO   SEQUENCE. 

I.      Exceptions  in  the  subjunctive. 

1.  In  result  clauses. 

a.  The  aorist  subjunctive  instead  of  an   imperfect.      It  has  al- 
ready been  noticed  (See  Chap.  VI,  3.)  that  the  imperfect  in  result 
clauses  often  comes  very  near,   or  is  exactly  equivalent   in  tense 
force  to,  an  aorist.      The  surprising  thing  is  not   that  there  are  ex- 
ceptions to  sequence  in  this  idiom,  but  that  there  are  so  few. 

II,  21,  5.  Ill,  15,  4.  V.  15,  i  (2);  54,  4.  VII,  17,  3,  (note  here  the  following 
sustentarent  with  equivalent  tense  force).  Total,  6. 

b.  The  imperfect  following  a  true  perfect. 

IV,  i,  10,  in  earn  se  consuetudinem  adduxerunt  ut  haberent  et  lavarentur;  they 
have  brought  themselves  to  such  a  habit  that  they  have,  etc.,  and  bathe,  etc.  Both 
sense  and  sequence  here  call  for  a  present,  but  the  habit  of  using  an  imperfect 
after  a  perfect  form  is  too  strong.  The  case  is  quite  different  in  III,  22,  3,  and 
VI,  17,  i;  for  although  our  translation  for  the  principal  verb  of  these  sentences 
would  be  "have",  they  are  not  perfects  but  aorists,  and  the  following  imperfects 
are  regular.  Total,  2. 

2.  The  aorist  following  an  aorist  in  concessive  cum  clause, 
I,  26,  2.     Total,  i. 

3.  The  past  future  following  a  true  perfect. 
VI,  ii,  4.     Total,  i. 

4.  The  present  of  a  general  truth  following  a  past  in  indirect 
question. 

VI,  35,  2  (2).     Total,  2. 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  4! 

5.  The  list  of  exceptions  in  the  subjunctive  might  have  been 
swelled  by  counting  the  cases  in  which  repraesentatio  in  indirect 
discourse  retains  the  exception.  One  in  result  and  one  in  a  con- 
cessive cum  clause  will  be  found  under  Chap  IX,  I.  But  repraesent- 
atio is  so  common  in  indirect  discoursj  that  it  seemed  fair  to  speak 
of  these  cases  as  "disguised."  Yet  I  give  here  one  case  of  an 
aorist  subjunctive  attracted  from  an  aorist  indicative  causal  quod 
clause. 

VI,  31,  i.     Total,  i. 

Total  for  the  section,   13.* 

II.      Tense  idioms  which  bring  about  exceptions  in  the  indicative 
A  large  number  of  indicatives  will  be  found  to  fall  under  one  or  an- 
other of  these  fixed  idioms. 

i.      The  aorist  vt\t\\  postquam,  simul  atque,  ubi. 

a.  Following   an   aorist.      It   is   worth   noting  how   strong    the 
preference  seems  to  be  for  confining  the  use  of  this  construction  to 
this  situation. 

I,  5,  2;  7,  3;  8,  3;  24,  i;  27,  3;  28,  i;  43,  4;  46,4;  49,  i;  50,  2.  II,  5,  4;  8,  2; 
9,  2;  19,  6;  25,  i;  31,  i.  Ill,  14,  i;  14,  2;  15,  2;  18,  3;  18,  5;  21,  3;  23,  7;  23,  8. 
IV,  19,  4;  25,  i;  26,  5;  27,  i;  28,  i;  37,  4.  V,  3,  3;  3,  5;  6,  4;  9,  i;  56,  i;  58,  3. 
VI,  8,  6;  9,  i;  29,  i.  VII,  3,  i;  12,  i;  12,  5;  26,  4;  28,  2;  51,  3.  Total,  45. 

b.  Following  a  perfect  participle  (Compare  remark  on  5). 

1.  12,  2;   16,  5.     II,  10,  4.     IV,  12,  i.     V,  32,  i.     VII,  58,  2.     Total,  6. 

c.  Following  other  past  forms. 
II,  30,  3.     VII,  82,  i.     Total,  2. 

d.  In  a  relative  clause  equivalent  in  meaning  to  a postqnam  clause 
(See  Chap.  IX,  IV.). 

IV,  18,  4.     V,  26,  i.     Total,  2. 

2.  Priusquam  with  aorist  indicative. 

I,  53-  I-     V,  17,  3-4  (2).     VII,  25,  4;  47,  3.     Total,  5. 

3.  Dum  with  the  present  indicative.      This  construction  also  is 
almost  entirely  confined  to  situations  where  it  can  follow  an  aorist. 

a.  Following  an  aorist. 

I,  27,  4;  39,  i;  46,  i.  Ill,  17,  i.  IV,  22,  i;  32,  i;  34,  3.  V,  22,  i;  35,  7;  37, 
2;  44,  11.  VI,  37,  i;  42,  i;  57,  i;  66,  i;  75,  i.  Total,  16 

b.  Following  a  perfect  participle  (Compare  remark  on  5  ). 

VII,  82,  3  (2).     Total,  2. 

c.  Following  other  past  forms. 
VI,  7,  i.     Total,  i. 


*Heynacher  (Sprachgebranch  Caesar's  im  bellum  Gallieum)  finds  36  exceptions.  The 
difference  is  due  to  the  fact  that  he  has  counted  in  those  retained  by  repraesentatio  in 
indirect  discourse,  while  I  have  not  done  so.  See  Chap.  IX,  I. 


42  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

4.  The  aorist  following  an  aorist  in  the  relation  of  "coincidence." 
For  cases  in  which  "coincidence"  brings  about  sequence  see  Chap. 
IX,  II,  i.      Some  of  the  past  future  conditions  in  Chap.  V,  II,  2, 
also  stand  in  this  relation. 

IV,  13,  4;   16,  i,     V,  8,  4.     VI,  30.  3.     VII,  57,  3.     Total,  5. 

5.  The   aorist  in  "pseudo-coincidence".      For  lack  of  a  better 
name   I   prefer  to  call    by  this  one    the    relation  of,   for  example, 
potuit,  in  such  phrases  as  quam  maxime potuit,  to  its  principal  verb. 
For  cases  in  which   "pseudo-coincidence"  brings   about  sequence 
see  Chap.  IX,  II,  2.      In  this  relation  the  tenses  agree  so  thorough- 
ly that  even  a  variation  between  historical  present  and  aorist  is  not 
allowed.      But  in  the  five  examples  in  which  the  clause  depends  on 
a  perfect  participle  the  aorist  is  used,  a  fact  which  may  possibly 
make  it  seem  that  in  classifying  other  clauses  depending  on  perfect 
participles  I  ought  to  have  regarded    the    participle  as  an  aorist 
rather  than  as  a  pluperfect. 

a.  Following  an  aorist. 

I,  7,  i;  7,  2.     II,  33,  4.     Ill,  9,  2;  9,  8.     V,  39,  i;  39,  2;  49,  7;  58,   6.     VII,  9, 
3:  43-  4:  55.  8;  63,  2.     Total,  13. 

b.  Following  a  perfect  participle. 

!.  37-  5-     IV-  21,  9;  35,  3. VII,  68,  2;  74,  i.     Total,  5. 

6.  The  aorist  following  an  aorist  in  the  relation  of  "congruence". 

II,  ii,  6.     IV,  12,  5.     Total,  2. 

7.  The  aorist  following  an  aorist  in  a  "balancing  clause". 
VI,  30,  2.     Total,  i, 

8.  The  aorist  in  a  cum-inversum  clause. 
VI,  7,  2;  8,  i.     VII,  26,  3  (2).     Total,  4. 

9.  The  aorist  in  a  cum  clause  of  date.      A  clause  which  brings 
in  from  outside  the  matter  in  hand  some  event  by  which  to  date  it 
is  naturally  likely  to  use  an  aorist. 

VI,  12,  i.     Total  i. 

Total  for  the  section,   in. 

III.  Indicative  exceptions  not  resulting  from  a  fixed  idiom.  Of 
these  i,  2,  3,  and  some  under  4,  result  from  the  necessary  relations 
of  thought,  leaving  very  few — a  part  of  those  under  4 — for  which  I 
can  see  no  necessity,  though  in  most  of  them  the  exception  seems 
natural  enough.  They  are  divided  here  according  to  tense  usage 
rather  than  syntactical  construction,  though  a  division  according  to 
the  latter  would  have  been  serviceable  too.  The  dependent  con- 
structions included  here,  and  the  number  of  examples  of  each,  are 
as  follows:  Relative  clauses,  148;  causal  and  concessive  with  quod, 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  43 

etc.,  and  etsi,  19;  substantive  quod,  2;  quam  after  comparatives,  2. 
The  relative  clauses  may  be  further  divided  as  follows:  Non- 
essential  (parenthetical  and  the  like,  including  ut  meaning  as),  117; 
determinative  (telling  what  person  or  thing  is  meant),  24;  general- 
izing, 7. 

1.  The  perfect  where  Caesar  uses  such  expressions  as  ut  ante 
dictum  est.     This    group    might    not    unreasonably  have  been  put 
under  II,  since  it  comes  very  near  to  being  a  fixed  idiom. 

I,  16,  2;  49,  3,     II,  i,  i;  9,  3;   18,  i;  22,   i;  29,  i.     Ill,  5,  2;   10,  i;   15,  i;  26,  2. 

IV,  4,  i;   16,  2;   17,  i;  28,  i;  35,  i,     V,  2,  2;  6,  i;   19,  i;  22,  i;  49,  2;  56,   3.     VI, 
2,  i;  8,  9;  34,  i;  35,  3;  38,  i;  40,  4.     VII,  17,  i;  25,  i;  37,  i;  48,  i;  70,  i;  76,  i; 
79,  2;  83,  8;  85,  4.    There  is  one  instance  of  a  similar  present,  VI,  24,  2.    Total,  38. 

2.  The  present  or  perfect  following  a  past  tense.      This  com- 
bination of  tenses  is  used  with  great  freedom  by  Caesar  in  describ- 
ing places  or  people,  giving  a  still  existing  cause  for  a  past  act,   the 
expression  of  general  truths,  etc.      But  in  Latin  even  more  than  in 
English  such  things  may  be  spoken  of  also  as  they  were  at  the  time 
of  the  narrative;  that  is,  in  imperfects  and  pluperfects.      This  hap- 
pens as  freely  in  independent  sentences  as  in  dependent,  so  that 
such  imperfects  and  pluperfects    are  not  to  be  regarded  as  due  to 
the  influence  of  sequence.      For  a  reason  that  will  appear  later  I 
have  given  in  separate  lists  the  presents  and  perfects  which  are 
used  in  clauses  with  causal  or  adversative  meaning,  whether  ex- 
pressed   formally    by  quod,   etsi,   etc.,   or  only  implied    in   relative 
clauses.      Of  the  verbs  included  in  these  latter  lists,  in  the  inde- 
pendent sentences  9  are  with  nam,  etc.;   i,  without;  in  the  depend- 
ent sentences,    15  are  with  quod,   etc.;   2,  with  etsi,  and   12  are  in 
non-essential  relative  clauses. 

a.      A  present  following  a  past. 

A.  Without  causal  or  adversative  meaning.     I,  10,  5;   12,  i.     Ill,    i,   5.     V,    3, 
i  (3);   n,  8;   18,  i;  21,  3;    56,  2  (2).  .  VI,  32,   3  (2).     VII,  57,  i;  58,  3.     Total,  15. 
With  causal  or  adversative  meaning.     II,  17,  4  (2);  30,  4.     Ill,  19,  6.     VII,  3,  2 
(4).     Total,  8. 

B.  Without  causal  or  adversative  meaning.     I,  8,  i  (2);  10,  i;  10,  5;   16,  5;  27, 
4;  28,  4;  38,  i;  54,  i.     II,  3,  i;  4,  10;  5,  4;  34  (2).     Ill,   i,   i;  i,   4;  9,   i;   n,   i; 
13,  4;  20,  i;  20,  2;  22,  i;  22,  2;  23,  3.     IV,  i,   i;   i,   10;  3,   3;  6,  4;  20,   3;  28,   2. 

V,  i,  2;   3,   4;  24,   4;  53,   6;   54,    2.     VI,    7,   8;   10,   5;  24,   2    (2);    29,   4  (3);   30,   3; 
31,   5;   32,    i;  33,    i;    33,    2;  33,    3;   35-   5-     VII,  4,  6;  5,  4;  7,  5;  8,  2;  24,  4;  55-  4! 
59,  5;  68,  i;  75,  4  (2).     Total,  59.     With  causal  or  adversative  meaning.     I,  2,  3; 
6,  2  (2);   38,  4.     II,  24,  4.     Ill,  8,  3;   12,  i;   18,  6;  21,  3.     IV,  5,  i   (2);  20,    i.     V, 
33,  4:  39,  i-     VI,  29,  i;  35,  6.     VII,  2,  2;  3,  3;  22,  i;  22,  2  (2);  26,  4;  30,   3;  35, 
2;  40,  7;  64,  4.     Total,  26. 

I).      A  perfect  following  a  past. 


44  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

A.  Without  causal  or  adversative  meaning.     V,  56,  2.     Total,  i.     With  causal 
or  adversative  meaning.     I,  12,  4.     V,  33,  i.     Total,   2. 

B.  Without  causal  or  adversative  meaning.     Ill,  9,  9.   IV,  24,  i;  29,  i.     V,    i, 
2;  7,   3.     VI,   31,   3.     VII,   21,    i;  42,   2.     Total,  8.     With   causal  or  adversative 
meaning.     I,  16,  2.     Ill,  26,  4.     VII,  75,  2.     Total,  3. 

3.  Imperfects  and  pluperfects  depending  on  presents.      In  each 
of  these  cases  it  will  be  found  that  the  imperfect  or  pluperfect  is 
necessarily  used  because  really  in  relation  with  the  time  of  the  nar- 
rative, though  its  clause  depends  syntactically  on  a  present. 

I,  6,  2.     V,  54,  5.     VI,  32,  4.     VII,  82,  3.      Total,  4. 

4.  The  aorist  following  a  past  tense. 

a.  Phrases  like  "as  actually  did  happen",  and  "as  he  afterwards 
learned".  Here  the  aorist  is  the  only  thing  possible. 

I,  22,  i.     II,  17,  2;  32,  4,   33,  2.     V,  8,  6;  58,  4.     Total,  6. 

Ir.  The  aorist  following  an  aorist  in  a  relation  somewhat  like 
that  of  "coincidence".  Here  the  aorist  is  more  natural  than  any 
other  tense. 

I,  28,  4;  51,  i.     II,  21,  i.     IV,  8,  i.     V,  2,  3.     VII,  8,  3.     Total,  6. 

c.  The  aorist    following   an  aorist  in  a  sort  of  a  summarizing 
generalizing   clause,   instead  of  imperfect  or  pluperfect  following 
an  imperfect.      Here  the  aorist  is  not  unnatural. 

II,  21,  6  (2);     IV,  14,  4.     VI,  31,  3.     (Here  erant  would  have  given  the  entirely 
wrong  meaning,  "who  happened  to  be  at  the  time").     VII,  62,  9.     Total,  5. 

d.  Aorist  where    an    imperfect  or    pluperfect    would    for   some 
special  reason  have  given  the  wrong  impression. 

I,  29,  3.     (I  think  imperfect  of  periphrastic  would  have  been  strictly  right,  but 
too  definite;  the  pluperfect  would   have  meant  "after  they  reached  home",  which 
is  probably  not  the  thing  intended).     II,  29,  4.     (Almost  a  coordinate  relative). 
IV,  i;  i  (2).     VII,  5,  6.     Total,  5. 

c.  The  aorist  where  I  should  have  expected  an  imperfect  or 
pluperfect.  The  aorist  here  is  sometimes  used  with  an  apparent 
wish  to  give  emphasis  or  point  to  a  statement. 

II,  35,4.     Ill,  16,  2.     V,  44,  4;   54,   4.     VI,    42,    3.     VII,    12,    2;   28,    5   (2);   31, 
i;  75,  i;  84,  4.     Total,  u. 

5.  The  present  following  an   imperfect  subjunctive  in   present 
conclusion  contrary  to  fact. 

A.     VII,  77,  6.     Total,  i. 

Total  for  the  section,   A,  27;   B,  171. 

Total  for  the  chapter,    A,  27;  B,  282;  C,  13. 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  45 

CHAPTER  XL 
COORDINATE    RELATIVE   SENTENCES   AND   CLAUSES. 

By  the  term  "coordinate  relative"  I  understand  all  the  relatives 
that  may  fairly  be  said  to  perform  the  functions  of  coordinating 
conjunctions;  in  other  words,  all  those  which  may  fairly  be  trans- 
lated by  "and  he",  "but  he",  etc.  This  use  of  the  relative  appears 
most  commonly  at  the  beginning  of  what  to  us  seem  wholly  inde- 
pendent sentences.  That  the  Romans  had  not  quite  the  same  feel- 
ing about  them  is  shown,  as  will  be  said  presently,  by  their  treat- 
ment of  them  in  indirect  discourse.  But  besides  these  apparently  in- 
dependent sentences  there  are  coordinate  relative  clauses  much  more 
closely  connected  with  a  main  clause.  That  these  were  subordinate, 
not  coordinate,  to  Caesar's  feeling,  is  shown  by  his  treatment  of 
them  in  indirect  discourse.  Nevertheless,  these  clauses  do  not 
give  the  situation  of  affairs,  or  subordinate  ideas,  but  state  coordi- 
nate facts;  and  the  same  tense  is  naturally  to  be  expected  as  in  the 
main  clause,  just  as  the  same  tense  is  commonly  used  in  clauses 
connected  by  coordinating  conjunctions.  It  has  seemed  fair  to 
treat  the  apparently  independent  sentences  as  really  independent, 
for  the  purposes  of  this  paper.  Accordingly  those  which  contain 
imperfects  and  pluperfects  have  been  included  among  independent 
sentences  in  the  statistics  given  in  the  preceding  chapters;  and 
those  which  contain  aorists  have  not  been  given  at  all.  In 
this  chapter  I  give  merely  the  statistics  for  them,  not  the  ex- 
amples themselves.  Of  the  more  nearly  subordinate  clauses,  those 
which  contain  imperfects  and  pluperfects  in  consequence  of  their 
depending  on  main  clauses  with  their  verbs  in  the  same  tenses 
might  have  been  given  in  previous  chapters,  among  other  dependent 
verbs  whose  tenses  are  in  sequence;  and  those  which  contain 
aorists  might  have  been  given  in  Chap.  X  among  other  exceptions 
to  sequence.  But  I  have  preferred  to  reserve  all  for  this  chapter. 
At  the  end  of  the  chapter  will  be  found  the  complete  statistics  in- 
cluding the  examples  here  given. 

I.  Apparently  independent  sentences.  For  these,  as  has  been 
said,  only  the  statistics  are  given. 

Present  or  perfect  following  present  or  perfect,  13. 
Present  or  perfect  following  a  past  tense,  5. 
Present  subjunctive  following  a  future,  i. 

Imperfect  or  pluperfect  following  a  past  tense,  i. 
Imperfect  or  pluperfect  following  an  imperfect  or  pluperfect,  30. 
•Imperfect  or  pluperfect  following  an  aorist,  18. 


46  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

Aorist  following  a  present  tense,  4. 

Aorist  following  an  imperfect  or  pluperfect,  16, 

Aorist  following  an  aorist,  101. 

Aorist  following  imperfect  subjunctive  in  unreal  condition,  i. 

Infinitive  in  indirect  discourse,  n. 
Subjunctive  for  imperative  in  indirect  discourse,    i. 

With  this  number  of  infinitives  in  relative  clauses  should  be  compared  the  ex- 
amples given  under  II,  i. 

II.      Clauses. 

i.  Coordinate  relative  clauses  in  indirect  discourse.  It  is  not 
correct,  so  far  as  Caesar's  practice  is  concerned,  to  say  that  such 
clauses  regularly  employ  the  infinitive. 

a.  It  has  already  been  noticed  that  in  the  apparently  independ- 
ent sentence  Caesar  has  eleven  instances  of  the  use  of  the  infinitive 
in  indirect  discourse.      The  following  examples  of  the  subjunctive 
in   sentences  which   to  my   feeling   are   quite  as  independent  show 
that  Caesar  felt  them  to  be  dependent  clauses. 

I,  20,  3.     II,  31,  4.     V,  29,  7.     VII,  14,  10;   20,  5;   39,  4.     Total,  6. 

b.  The  following  examples  are  to  my  feeling  coordinate  relative 
clauses,  not  independent  sentences.      Caesar  has  no  example  of  an 
infinitive  in  such  clauses,  showing  that  to  him   the}'  were  subordi- 
nate, not  coordinate. 

1.  31,  10;  37,  3;  45,  2  (2).     II,  14,  2.      V,  21,  2;  26,  4;  53,  i.      VII,  5,  5;   14,  7; 
20,  7;  29,  4;  44,  3.     Total,  14. 

2.  With  present  indicative.      These  are  all  in  sequence. 

I,  i,  i;  i,  3.  IV,  i,  4;  2,  3.  V,  13,  i.  VI,  13,  i  (2);  13,  2;  13,  8;  16,  4. 
Total,  10. 

3.  With  imperfect  indicative.      These  are  all  in  sequence. 
I,  16,  3.     II,  i,  4.     Total,  2. 

4.  With  aorist  indicative.      These  are  all  out  of  sequence. 

I,  53,  3-  H,  15,  2;  31,  2.  IV,  4,  i  (2);  7,  2.  V,  i,  3;  48,  TO.  VII,  63,  7. 
Total,  9. 

In  giving  the  following  complete  statistics  I  do  not  include  the 
figures  given  in  I  of  the  present  chapter.  Aside  from  them  we 
have  found  952  dependent  indicatives  and  1881  subjunctives  in 
sequence,  and  291  dependent  indicatives  and  13  subjunctives  out 
of  sequence. 


THE  SEQUENCE  OF  TENSES  IN  LATIN.  47 

CHAPTER    XII. 

THE    PROOF    OF    A    SEQUENCE    FEELING. 

I  hope  I  have  now  shown  that  the  tenses  of  the  subjunctive  and 
indicative  alike  are  used  in  accordance  with  definite  meanings  of 
their  own,  both  in  sequence  and  out  of  it;  and  that  the  choice  of 
tenses  is  determined  by  the  meaning  just  as  much  in  one  mood  as 
the  other,  barring  a  few  idioms. 

But  this  does  not  prove  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  sequence. 
We  have  yet  to  consider  the  reasons  for  the  great  disproportion 
between  the  exceptions  in  the  indicative  and  those  in  the  subjunc- 
tive. 

Leaving  out  the  idioms,  Professor  Hale's  explanation  is  that  in 
the  mass  the  indicative  constructions  are  less  closely  connected  in 
thought  with  the  principal  clauses  than  are  the  subjunctive  ones. 
This  is  undeniably  good  so  far  as  it  goes.  Though  most  of  the 
indicative  constructions  are  as  closely  connected  as  the  subjunctive 
are,  yet  the  indicative  relative  clauses  are  all  of  such  a  nature  as  to 
be  suitable  for  bringing  in  statements  disconnected  with  the  narra- 
tive, and  hence  show  many  exceptions.  We  have  already  seen 
that  most  of  the  indicative  exceptions  which  do  not  fall  under  one 
of  the  fixed  idioms  are  in  relative  clauses.  But  if  we  can  compare 
any  constructions  which  are  to  be  found  with  like  meanings  in  in- 
dicative and  subjunctive,  and  with  no  closer  connection  of  thought 
in  the  one  mood  than  the  other;  and  if  in  the  indicative  we  find  a 
considerable  number  of  exceptions,  while  there  are  few  or  none  in 
the  subjunctive;  we  shall  then  be  forced  to  assume  that  some  other 
influence  is  at  work.  Such  a  set  of  examples  is  given  best  in 
Caesar  by  the  causal  and  adversative  clauses.  When  Caesar 
wishes  to  express  a  past  reason  for  or  against  a  past  act,  he  uses 
with  apparent  indifference  the  subjunctive  with  cum  or  indicatives 
with  quod,  etc. ,  with  relatives,  or  independently  with  or  without  nam,  * 
etc.  But  Caesar  is  very  fond  of  giving  a  still  existing  reason  for  a  past 
act,  and  the  verb  which  expresses  the  reason  must  of  course  be  in 
the  present.  Now  in  every  case  of  this  kind  Caesar  uses  one  of  the 

*This  point  seems  so  certain  that  I  have  riot  thought  it  necessary  to  make  an  inde- 
pendent count  of  the  clauses  with  quod,  etc.  and  cum,  but  have  availed  myself  of  the 
statistics  of  Heynacher  (Sprachgebrauch  Caesar's  im  bell  urn  Gallicum).  He  finds,  of 
quod  causal  with  the  indicative.  1:56;  of  quod  causal  with  the  subjunctive  of  indirect 
discourse,  44;  of  quoniam,  16;  of  etsi  and  tametxi  with  the  indicative,  23.  In  all  219;  but 
this  number  includes  the  clauses  which  are  out  of  sequence  as  well  as  those  in  se- 
quence. Of  cum  causal  with  principal  tenses  he  quotes  Proksch  as  giving  18.  With 
imperfect  and  pluperfect  he  says  he  once  counted  some  70,  but  has  come  to  find 
but  20.  Probably  most  counts  would  fall  somewhere  between  the  two  limits,  and  if 
one  counted,  as  would  be  fair  for  my  purpose,  all  those  in  which  there  is  any  causal 
feeling,  probably  there  would  be  found  more  than  70.  Of  cum  concessive  he  finds  18 
sure  cases  and  some  doubtful  ones.  In  all,  at  the  least  possible  calculation,  56;  and 
including  those  fairly  to  be  counted  for  my  purpose,  at  least  luo. 


48  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

indicative  constructions,  avoiding  the  subjunctive  (See  Chap.  X, 
III,  2).  I  can  see  no  reason  for  this  except  that  he  had  a  feeling 
that  the  subjunctive  tenses  ought  not  to  be  used  in  connections 
which  we  call  out  of  sequence.*  It  must  be  noted  however  that 
he  has  one  aorist  subjunctive  exception  (See  Chap.  X,  I,  2)  and 
another  in  indirect  discourse  (See  Chap.  IX,  I,  7).  It  must  be  ad- 
mitted that  this  number  of  examples  in  a  single  construction  is  not 
a  large  foundation  on  which  to  build  a  theory.  But  on  them,  sup- 
ported by  such  statistics  as  I  have  been  able  to  secure  for  these 
and  other  constructions  in  other  authors,  and  further  supported  by 
theoretical  considerations,  I  venture  to  offer  a  theory  as  fairly 
probable. 

I  believe  that  while  there  was  no  sequence  feeling  which  could 
force  a  subjunctive  tense  to  be  used  inconsistently  with  its  true 
meaning,  or  could  wrest  those  tenses  from  their  true  meanings  ex- 
cept in  few  constructions,  there  was  a  feeling,  existing  for  the  sub- 
junctive and  not  for  the  indicative,  which  made  a  failure  in  se- 
quence seem  strange  in  the  subjunctive  but  not  in  the  indicative. 
That  consequently,  whenever  the  relations  of  thought  made  an  ex- 
ception to  sequence  necessary,  there  was  an  unconscious  tendency 
to  avoid  subjunctive  constructions  and  use  indicatives  instead. 

I  believe  that  this  feeling  exerted  an  unconscious  influence  upon 
the  whole  form  of  many  sentences,  with  the  result  that  the  non-se- 
quent ideas  were  often  thrown  into  indicative  relative  clauses  rather 
than  expressed,  as  they  would  otherwise  have  been,  in  some  entire- 
ly different  subjunctive  constructions.  But  this  is  too  delicate  a 
matter  to  be  reached  by  statistics.  There  are,  however,  a  few  con- 
structions of  the  indicative  which  correspond  so  closely  to  those  of 
the  subjunctive  that  a  comparison  can  be  made  with  ease  and,  as  I 
think,  with  decisive  results. 

Best  of  all,  and  for  taesar  the  only  one,  is  the  causal-adversative 
relation,  which  has  already  been  discussed. 

Something  might  be  done  with  the  expression  of  general  truths 
in  indirect  questions.  The  single  sentence  in  which  Caesar  has  a 

*It  may  be  objected  that  there  is  strictly  no  such  thing  as  a  separate  causal-adver- 
sative use  of  the  subjunctive.  That  it  is  only  a  special  case  of  the  cam  clause  which 
is  used  to  give  the  attendant  circumstances,  the  situation.  That  it  can  therefore  be 
used  only  to  give  the  attendant  circumstances  or  the  situation  resulting  from  u  past 
act,  and  is  not  the  natural  construction  to  use  when  one  wishes  to  bring  in  a  cause, 
etc.,  from  a  different  time-sphere.  My  reply  would  be  two  fold  In  the  first  place,  I 
believe  this  is  largely  true  and  for  the  origin  of  the  clause  I  believe  it,  is  quite  true. 
But  this  is  only  a  particular  instance  of  what  I  believe  "sequence  of  tenses"  is  in  all 
constructions.  I  believe  all  subjunctive  constructions  were  fitted,  at  least  at  then- 
origin,  to  express  only  such  thought  relations  as  were  in  sequence.  But  in  the  second 
place,  the  grroun-1  of  the  objection  is  wholly  true  only  at  the  origin  For  that  the 
causal-adversative  construction  was  differentiated  from  the  temporal  clause  is  shown 
by  the  fact  that  it  spread  into  the  primary  tenses,  while  the  temporal  subjunctive  did 
not.  And  Caesar's  two  instances  of  the  use  of  the  aorist  in  this  construction  suffice  to 
show  that  he  could  use  other  tenses  than  the  imperfect  and  pluperfect  when  he  liked. 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  49 

present  depending  on  a  past  is  of  this  kind  (See  Chap.  X,  I,  4). 
It  has  already  been  said  that  the  imperfect  in  such  expressions  is 
not,  in  one  sense,  to  be  accounted  for  by  sequence,  for  it  is  used  in 
independent  sentences  as  well  as  in  dependent  clauses.  But  I  be- 
lieve that,  if  enough  examples  were  at  hand  to  prove  it,  it  would 
be  found  that  the  proportion  of  exceptional  subjunctives  is  smaller 
than  of  exceptional  indicatives;  and  in  that  case  I  should  say  that 
the  sequence  feeling  had  led  to  the  choice  of  one  tense  out  of  two 
which  were  equally  possible  so  far  as  meaning  was  concerned. 

A  result  may  be  expressed  by  an  ut  or  by  an  independent  sen- 
tence with  an  illative  conjunction.  In  an  author  fond  of  stating 
present  results  of  past  acts  I  should  expect  to  find  a  larger  propor- 
tion of  exceptions  in  the  independent  sentences.  Here,  however, 
the  sequence  feeling  has  a  greater  resistance  to  overcome,  since,  to 
avoid  an  exception,  it  would  be  necessary  to  break  up  what  should 
perhaps  be  a  single  sentence;  and  the  results  could  not  be  expect- 
ed to  be  as  striking  as  in  some  other  cases. 

In  some  cases  there  would  be  a  possible  choice  between  a  sub- 
stantive result  and  a  substantive  quod  clause,  and  I  should  expect 
some  evidence  from  comparing  these  cases. 

Something  might  result  from  the  study  of  relative  clauses,  for  a 
rhetorical  determinative,  for  example,  might  occasionally  be  used 
instead  of  a  characterizing  clause.  But  this  again  is  almost  too 
delicate  a  matter  for  statistics. 

Besides  such  proof  by  statistics,  I  believe  a  sure  theoretical 
ground  can  be  given  for  expecting  to  find  such  a  sequence  feeling 
in  existence. 

The  original  meanings  of  the  subjunctive  have  been  spoken  of  in 
Chapter  V.  From  constructions  with  these  meanings  I  assume 
that  the  constructions  showing  all  the  other  meanings  have  been 
derived.  I  accept  Professor  Hale's  explanation  of  the  processes, 
so  far  as  they  have  yet  been  given  out;  but  it  is  of  little  conse- 
quence for  my  argument  whether  or  not  one  accepts  his  theories  in 
all  details,  provided  one  agrees  with  the  main  proposition. 

The  subjunctive  originally  ^expressed  various  feelings, — will,  wish, 
*  'ideal  certainty,"  etc.  When  used  before  the  dependent  stage 
these  feelings  must,  in  each  instance  of  their  expression,  either  have 
grown  out  of  the  situation  spoken  of  and  have  been  expressed  by  a 
tense  of  the  same  time-sphere  (true  parataxis),  or  else  have  ex- 
pressed the  speaker's  present  feelings,  being  a  sort  of  digression 
from  the  matter  in  hand  (true  independence).  From  this  true 
parataxis  was  developed  hypotaxis,  in  which,  so  long  as  any  con- 


5O  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

struction  retains  the  original  meaning  of  its  mood,  the  tenses  will 
almost  or  quite  invariably  be  in  sequence.  Of  course,  repraesentatio 
may  at  any  time  cause  the  substitution  of  the  tense  that  would  have 
been  used  by  the  actor;  but  this  is  no  more  an  exception  to  se- 
quence than  the  historical  present  is.  For  example,  a  command 
or  purpose  would  be  felt  as  growing  out  of  the  situation  spoken  of, 
and  would  be  in  a  tense  of  the  same  time-sphere  as  the  verb  of 
commanding,  etc.:  "he  commands,  he  is  to  go;"  "he  commanded, 
he  was  to  go,"  or  by  repraesentatio  "he  commaded,  'he  is  to  go.'' 
And  the  consecutive  idea  must  be  similarly  connected  in  thought 
with  the  situation:  "he  is  so  good  as  that  he  would  help  you"  (in  a 
time  future  to  the  present);  "he  was  so  good  as  that  he  was  likely 
to  help  you"  (in  a  time  future  to  the  past).  The  parenthetical 
purpose  clause  would,  of  course,  show  many  exceptions,  from  its 
very  nature,  but  I  can  hardly  think  of  other  sucn  constructions. 
Consequently,  whatever  tense  constructions  are  assumed  to  have 
existed  before  the  derived  meanings  of  the  subjunctive  sprang  up 
were  practically  all  in  what  we  call  sequence,  and  this  could  hardly 
fail  to  start  a  habit  which  would  make  itself  felt  as  soon  as  the 
other  meanings  appeared. 

But  in  the  indicative  clauses  no  such  thing  was  to  be  expected. 
The  indicative  must  from  the  start  have  been  used  to  express  facts 
from  all  times,  and  two  facts  from  different  time-spheres  could  and 
would  easily  be  brought  together  in  the  relation,  for  example,  of 
cause  and  effect;  and  these  clauses  could  be  connected  by  conjunc- 
tions and  relatives.  So  while  the  subjunctive  had,  by  the  very 
nature  of  its  meanings,  to  be  in  sequence,  the  indicative  just  as  in- 
evitably had  many  exceptions.  The  tenses  of  both  moods  were 
still  used  with  entire  freedom,  but  in  one  the  conditions  were 
favorable  for  the  growth  of  a  sequence  feeling,  in  the  other  they 
were  not. 

If  so  much  be  admitted  I  do  not  see  how  the  rest  can  be  dis- 
puted. Certainly  I  do  not  see  how  one  who  agrees  with  Professor 
Hale's  theory  of  the  result  clauses  can  consistently  deny  sequence 
elsewhere.  This  theory  is  that  the  past  future  subjunctive  in  such 
a  sentence  as  "he  was  so  good  as  that  he  would  help"  went  nearly 
or  quite  over  into  such  an  aorist  meaning  as  "that  he  did  help", 
but  that  because  the  imperfect  would  be  used  in  the  original  sen- 
tence the  habit  still  remained  in  the  developed  construction*.  What 


*Professor  Hale  feels  that  this  is  too  strong  &  statement  of  his  position.  His  belief 
is  rather  that  to  a  Roman  the  imperfect  carried  always  much  of  the  "such  as  to"  Idea, 
while  the  aorist  means  "so  that  he  did".  His  treatment  of  the  construction  is  given 
in  A.  J.  P.  VIII,  pp.  49-53.  I  find  there  no  quotable  passage  to  bring  out  this  point, 
though  there  are  indications  of  it  here  and  there. 


THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN.  5! 

is  this  but  sequence?  And,  too,  it  is  sequence  acting  under  the 
hardest  possible  conditions,  since  it  had  to  keep  a  tense  form  after 
the  force  had  become  nearly  or  quite  equivalent  to  that  of  another 
tense.  If  this  explanation  of  the  origin  of  the  use  of  the  tense  is 
possible  (and  I  accept  it)  then  surely  it  may  be  admitted  that  all 
along  the  line,  wherever  a  developed  construction  arose,  there 
must  have  been  the  habit  at  the  start  of  using  it  only  in  sequence; 
and  that,  as  nothing  happened  to  break  up  this  habit,  it  must  have 
continued.  For  in  no  other  case,  except  in  the  breakdown  of  the 
priusqitam,  etc.,  clause,  where  precisely  the  same  thing  happened, 
did  the  habit  have  so  much  pressure  to  resist;  since  only  in  those 
clauses,  did  the  developed  construction  take  on  an  aorist  tense 
meaning. 

The  chief  constructions  in  which  this  development  appears  are: 
From  "ideal  certainty", — clauses  of  result,  characterizing  clauses, 
causal  and  adversative  clauses,  and  cum  clauses;  from  the  volitive,— 
the  clauses  of  propriety  and  the  concessive  clauses  with  ut,  ne  or 
quamvis\  from  a  yet  uncertain  source,— indirect  questions  and  in- 
direct discourse.  Professor  Hale's  (^///-Constructions  gives  the 
process  of  development  of  all  the  first  group  from  the  subjunctive 
of  "ideal  certainty".  In  all  of  them  except  result  and  some  char- 
acterizing clauses  it  will  be  seen  that  the  act  or  state  of  the  subordi- 
nate clause  is  regularly  used  to  describe  a  situation,  so  that  the  im- 
perfect and  pluperfect  simply  take  on  the  meanings  of  the  corres- 
ponding indicative  tenses  instead  of  the  aorist.  However,  having 
once  taken  on  the  meanings  of  the  corresponding  indicative  tenses, 
there  seems  to  me  to  be  nothing  to  keep  them  from  being  used  out 
of  sequence  except  the  habit  already  spoken  of.  So,  too,  the  con- 
structions derived  from  the  volitive  take  on  meanings  equivalent  to 
those  of  the  descriptive  indicative  tenses,  and  seem  to  be  held  in 
sequence  only  by  habit.  Although  the  origin  of  the  subjunctive  in 
dependent  questions  and  dependent  clauses  of  the  indirect  discourse 
is  still  uncertain,  at  least  there  seems  no  reason  for  supposing  that 
anything  happened  in  their  development  which  would  interfere 
with  the  growth  and  persistence  of  the  habit. 

On  the  the  other  hand  nothing  happened  in  the  growth  of  the 
indicative  constructions  to  make  a  similar  feeling  arise  for  this 
mood.  More  than  that,  habit  did  settle  down  on  certain  non- 
sequence  idioms  in  the  indicative;  for  example,  the  aorist  in  post- 
^7/#///-clauses  in  contradistinction  to  the  tenses  of  the  stage  in  aim- 
clauses.  These  idioms  must  have  had  a  tendency  to  check  the  rise 
of  a  sequence  feeling  if  any  had  threatened. 


52  THE    SEQUENCE    OF    TENSES    IN    LATIN. 

To  sum  up  then  in  the  briefest  possible  form  the  results  of  this 
paper:  1  believe  that  in  Caesar  every  tense  of  the  subjunctive  and 
indicative  alike  has  its  own  meaning  and  is  never  wrested  from  that 
meaning  by  a  rule  of  sequence.  But  I  believe  also  that  Caesar  had 
a  feeling  of  sequence  that  led  him  to  avoid  irregular  uses  of  the 
subjunctive,  and  gave  him  a  tendency  to  use  an  equivalent  indica- 
tive construction  if  possible,  or  otherwise  to  recast  the  sentence.  I 
believe  further  that  other  writers  will  show  much  the  same  precise- 
ness  of  meaning  in  the  tenses,  and  the  same  tendency  to  avoid  ir- 
regular subjunctives. 

THE  RESULTS  OF  AN  EXAMINATION  OF  OTHER  AUTHORS. 

1  append  a  bare  summary  of  the  results  of  two  carefully  written 
and  verified  papers  prepared  at  my  suggestion  as  Master's  theses 
in  the  University  of  Kansas.  Both  studies  were  intended  to  test 
the  theory  that  where  an  exception  to  sequence  was  logically  nec- 
essary and  there  was  a  choice  between  indicative  and  subjunctive 
constructions  the  Latin  writer  preferred  the  indicative. 

Miss  Mary  E.  Frost,  in  1898,  made  an  examination  of  the  usage 
of  Tacitus  as  shown  in  the  Annals,  I-VI,  with  the  following  results: 
In  causal  clauses  and  independent  sentences  with  causal  meaning, 
235  indicatives  in  sequence,  74  out  of  sequence;  79  subjunctives  in 
sequence,  3  out  of  sequence.  In  adversative  clauses,  7  indicatives 
in  sequence,  3  out  of  sequence;  49  subjunctives  in  sequence,  3  out 
of  sequence.  In  result  clauses  and  independent  sentences  with 
result  meaning,  10  indicatives  in  sequence,  86  out  of  sequence;  42 
subjunctives  in  sequence,  10  out  of  sequence. 

Mr.  Tenny  Frank,  in  1899,  made  a  similar  examination  of  the 
usage  of  Sallust  (both  the  Catiline  and  the  Jugurthine  War},  with  the 
following  results:  In  causal  and  adversative  clauses  and  inde- 
pendent sentences  of  similar  meanings,  107  indicatives  in  sequence, 
22  out  of  sequence;  25  subjunctives  in  Sequence,  o  out  of  sequence. 
In  result  clauses  and  independent  sentences  with  result  meaning,  3 
indicatives  in  sequence,  22  out  of  sequence;  21  subjunctives  in 
sequence,  o  out  of  sequence. 

Mr.  Frank  furthermore,  by  the  use  of  Merguet's  "Lexikon,"  ex- 
amined Cicero's  usage  in  causal  and  adversative  clauses  as  shown 
in  the  Verrine  Orations,  with  the  following  results:  In  causal 
clauses,  84  indicatives  in  sequence,  24  out  of  sequence;  85  sub- 
junctives in  sequence,  i  out  of  sequence.  In  adversative  clauses, 
9  indicatives  in  sequence,  4  out  of  sequence;  22  subjunctives  in 
sequence,  o  out  of  sequence. 


RETURN    CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 

TO—  *    202  Main  Library 

LOAN  PERIOD  1 
HOME  USE 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

Renewals  and  Recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  the  due  date. 
Books  may  be  Renewed  by  calling        642-3405 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 


JAN  1  8  199 

3ECEIV 

FP 

B-fl  —  4   Q 

vQnr 

• 

•oj 

N  DEPT. 

FORM  NO.  DD6 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY 
BERKELEY,  CA  94720 


®s 


TU    UUH70 


